We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.
Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]
|
EU to get its own state symbols Reuters reports:
A future European Union constitution will include a flag, an anthem, a motto and a Europe Day, despite British reticence about such state symbols.
The 105-member Convention on the Future of Europe decided at its final session on Thursday to add a reference to the symbols of the 15-nation bloc, due to be enlarged to 25 states next May, in a draft constitution submitted to EU leaders.
The official EU anthem is the “Ode to Joy” from Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony, the flag is the dark blue banner with 12 yellow stars in a circle, and the motto is “United in Diversity”, not dissimilar from the first motto of the United States, “e pluribus unum”.
Europe Day is May 9, commemorating a historic speech by French Foreign Minister Robert Schuman, one of the EU’s founding fathers, proposing the creation of a European Coal and Steel Community. [emphasis added]
Oh no, we are not imitating anybody!
|
Who Are We? The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling.
We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe.
|
Indonesia’s national slogan is ‘Unity in Diversity’. So the EU has managed to get that Third World je ne sais quoi just right. Maybe they could record ‘Ode to Joy’ played on the gamelin.
Might I suggest “Suckers!” for the new EU slogan?
Unity in Diversity. Ow. That makes my head hurt.
Sameness in Difference.
Together in Apartness.
Uniquity in Variety.
Singleness in Variousness.
Oneness in Dissimilarity.
Identity in Divergency.
Stop me. I’m hurting myself.
…Oh no, we are not imitating anybody!…
If they are, they made a right muddy muck-up of the job! Sheeeeesh…they can’t even do a pale imitation very well.
The “Ode to Joy” has always struck me as an interesting choice. Schiller originally wrote an ode to “Freiheit”, but the imperial censor thought “Freude” more appropriate, and so that’s still the official story.
Kraft durch Freude.
Are you all nervous about European success?
UK subjects: leave before it’s too late…
😉
Unity in Diversity
Ignorance is Strength?
RE. Kodiak, if I could I’d tie a rope to Lands End, get out the rowboat and get towing.
Europes “success” is irrelevant to me pretty much. No success is worth being ruled by an unelected Commission/Politbureau. And any “success” the EU has had is open to debate.
The U.S. slogan “E Pluribus Unum” unites many into one, an American.
The EU slogan is Orwellian double speak.
In other words they’re united in their quest for diversity, not united in their quest for freedom, liberty, justice, etc. It’s difference, for difference’s sake.
They put stuff like flags, anthems, mottos and holidays in the constitution? Really? Why? I mean, if any group ever needed a strong editorial hand, this floating constitutional convention would be that group. These are matters for legislation, and pretty damn minor legislation at that.
Many of you here make decent anti-Euro points, & i’ve been alerted to a load of dodgy EU legislation thanks to this site, but this partisan mocking of anything to do with the EU’s kinda stupid.
Unity in Diversity… yeah, fine it sounds PC or whatever, but hey! it’s surely a good expression of what they’re trying to achieve… & if you think it’s an impossible goal or some kind of self-contradictory phrase well, hey! the beatles never existed, did they, seeing as Paul & John had such different characters. They couldn’t possibly have written any songs together.. nono; i mean how could it possibly have worked?
Not saying the EU’s anything like the beatles.. that’d be stupid (tho’ i’d be interested to see the EU’s white album :P)
Plus, these boards are stuffed full of folk saying Europe should be just like the US… but as soon as they take bits on board, oh no! mockery.
I genuinely believe the EU could enact the most libertarian laws imaginable, & the kneejerk reaction of most on this site would be to try & knock them as some Froggie imposition.
(now, before the comment backlash, no.. i’m not happy with the idea of an unelected EU commission having power over our elected governments… nor am I happy with much of the economic protectionism currently involved, or the nanny state legislation. However, I have no trouble with the idea of a large united states of europe type idea in principle, and see no more inherent danger in this idea than I do in any government; the Federal government in the US hasn’t yet reduced the country to a state of subservience)
S. Weasel:
How about “Toil makes freedom”? 🙂
Are you all nervous about European success
Success in terms of closer integration with it, yes.
Success in terms of it enriching the experience of UK citizenship hence proving my dislike of the notion as misplaced, no.
Your question is really to vague.
I know this remark is off the subject but, is there anyone in Europe who has any concern or support for the people of Iran currently fighting against their oppressive, terrorist “Socialist government” regime? Or do people need another bloodbath in order to justify showing any concern or support.
BBC’s propaganda is disgusting! They are great advocators of “Socialism” slumville.
I’m not against Europe as a free trade area. I don’t really think we need any European political guidance on liberty in some sort of federal system mind, we can do that ourselves. Thatcher started out pro EU in 1979, but she didn’t like the way it evolved. The idea is potentially sound, the current implementation stinks.
I could be moved to lukewarmness on the EU if thought it’s institutions were not a bad thing, but the constitution they have knocked up is -awful-. If eurozone growth was running at 10% a year I’d still be saying no with the odious Commission in such power. It’s just not worth this almighty risk, in 20 years time who knows who will be on the Commission and what they will be doing. I’m not a libertarian, but on this count I have to say the loss of liberty/democracy the EU poses must be resisted, no matter what benefits/bribes go our way.
Thing is, its abundantly clear that there is no reform on the cards. At all. This is it. Commission and all.
No thanks.
With the way that the Pope encouraged the Poles to vote for joining the EU, does anyone think the Pope would lean on Iain Duncan Smith to take a less anti-EU stance if he became PM?
Which way would he jump?
Or do we see the start of this already, with the Tory leader to calm Europe fears story…?
(A clarification to the above post – IDS is a practising Roman Catholic)
I *want* Europe to succeed and thrive. I *want* Europe to have a vital and growing economy, a place where business can grow and people can get jobs.
I actually believed, at one time, we’d see some great companies arise in Europe that would compete head to head with those in Japan, the US, etc..
I’m a die hard capitalist. I believe competition is good for everyone .. especially the consumer.
“Afraid of EU Success”? Never fear competition! When companies compete, it’s great!!
I’m upset *because* I see what has been cobbled together as the EU will fall under the weight of all the regulation and red tape. The EU will *not* be a place that grows vibrant companies, able to compete worldwide.
The EU’s need to be a counterweight to the US doesn’t concern me. If they are, they are. If they aren’t they aren’t. I’m not interested in competing countries. Had enough of that during the Cold War, thank you very much.
Why I’m anti-EU is because I think it will fail. I’m shocked that so many nations, with long proud histories, are so willing to yield up their sovereignty.
I see a recipe for disaster that could possibly result in some type of war. I’d like to avoid that. Because almost all of my ancestors came from the UK, I’m particularly upset the UK is taking part in this madness. I can’t believe what I’m seeing, when it comes to the UK.
I have a slogan, we could adopt, for the European Union:
(With apologies to Cato – Carthago delenda est! – ‘Carthage must be destroyed!’ 🙂
Are they going to be distributing the EU flags? I only ask because I have just noticed that my stock of toilet paper is running a bit low.
A flag
A song
A slogan
A language….?
Without the last bit Europe will always be a hodgepodge agglomeration. Think about it. The difference between the US and EU is that your starting position is enormous lignuistic/cultural diversity (don’t let the “from many, one” fool you–that referred to youthful, small colonies, not nations; the founding fathers were clones compared to the leaders of the EU).
And what of the founding mythology of this nascent megastate? A bunch of guys going into a meeting room for several years and producing a ponderous constitution? That’ll make a tremendous “national” holiday. Whoopee. I am beginning to understand the reason for Europe’s rising anti-Americanism. We will be the stand-in for the colonial hegemon, from which “independence” is being sought. If the enemy does not exist we will create him out of whole cloth.
Pathetic.
The boys at Rueter’s obviously do not speak Latin. E Pluribus Unum means “the many are one”. This is almost the exact opposite of “united in diversity”, if that Orwellian newspeak means anything at all.
Just out of curiosity, since the EU has obviously stolen the idea for their flag from the blue field and circle of stars that was on our first flag, will they add a star for each new country that joins? And if not, what does that say to new EU members about their worth?
Kelli, good to see you back!
I don’t think “united in diversity” is really all that Orwellian. E Pluribus Unum is only slightly less paradoxical, really. I think it’s a pretty sound slogan, a good description of the EU’s ideal. Anyone who knows me knows I’m not inclined to stick up for the EU, either.
But the problem is, it’s an inaccurate description of what is actually going on. The idea behind the EU is essentially the Soviet Union Lite, with each territory allowed to retain the symbols–and the symbols only–of its historical national identity. The hope is that regional differences will somehow evaporate like a fart in the wind just as soon as the right level of economic and political centralization has been achieved.
This is misguided nonsense, precisely because it is based on what is an irrational cosmopolitanism and an intellectual rejection of nationalism. While I sympathize with the historical reasons for it, I also know that Europeans are deeply mistaken about the nature of provincialism and the tenacity of local loyalties. The role of Catholicism in Polish culture and national identity, to take just one example, will prove to be a serious source of social discontent if Brussels is permitted to have its way by imposing some transnational standard of human rights on the whole of Europe (to include gay marriage, abortion on demand, solid emphasis on secular education, and so forth). Will this come to be percieved as Bismarck’s Revenge, the second coming of the Prussian kulturkampf? Perhaps not, but there’s no reason to believe that none of the hundreds of other possible examples of potential friction will explode into view.
All the evidence you need for that is the premise itself–that of constant French and German attempts to impose (by economic blackmail) their vision of European unity on the world. No lasting harmony can be built on such a foundation. Sorry, Europe, but nationalism isn’t going anywhere, and you will find, as you always have, that culture will trump ideology again and again, and that while the latter makes its attempts at wooing the mind, the former will invariably capture and hold the attention of the passions.
Never mind Mrs T, I was pro-EC in 1979. (There wasn’t an EU for another 15 years.) But then I didn’t know much about continental jurisprudence or the nature of the institutions, I just though free trade and free movement of people was a good thing–I still do.
Isn’t the point of E Pluribus Unum (which I gloss as “out of the many, one”) that the States and People pre-exist the Union and grant it its powers?
The heirarchy of powers in the EU Constitution, which is a different sort of document from the US Constitution despite the similarity of names, is more nuanced. The People have no part. The institutions of the Union aren’t created by the Constitution but have some independent existence founded in earlier treaties. The Member States effectively alienate all their powers over an open set of things to the Union then get some of them back through subsidiarity (which is more nearly meaningless the closer you look at it).
Maybe “United in Diversity” means something like “we agree to differ” or “nobody has any idea whats going on”…
Thanks, Belle 🙂
Sage,
You raise some interesting points–I wonder if the cultural/religious conservatives within western Europe (especially recent immigrants) will end up joining hands with their counterparts in central and, eventually, eastern Europe to oppose the dictates of Brussels?
Sage – Articulate and interesting analysis. So you’re saying the EU cannot ever be a coherent identity, even by force? But wouldn’t you have said the same thing about the USSR? Those enslaved countries also had their own histories and a thousand or more years of folk identity.
It’s interesting that while the coils and knots are tightening on the populations of European countries and they are forced into identikit slots to serve Giscard’s “Europe” – those coils and knots may be loosening in an even more populous part of the world. If the government of China starts to lose its grip, 1.2 billion energetic, clever people will be released into the world economy. Where are the economies of 400 million fat, lazy, greedy Europeans going to go against this tsuni of commercial energy?
SAGE
“All the evidence you need for that is the premise itself–that of constant French and German attempts to impose (by economic blackmail) their vision of European unity on the world”
Why don’t you join the Euroland? You could at least try to counterbalance the Frogo-Teutonic axis of evil. Would be better than crying & complaining all by yourself & unheard of.
Merlin,
First, “E Pluribus Unum” means “Out of the many, One”.
Second, the Euro flag officially comes from the 12-starred “Crown of the Virgin Mary”, which is why the number of stars is independent of the number of countries.
Conspiracy theorists – Note that all the Labour/Tory ministers in strong favour of the Millennium Dome were Europhiles. Combine this with the facts that the Dome has the same form as the Virgin Mary’s crown (overhead plan has 12 yellow supports matching the 12 stars) and the Body Zone was originally to have been a Mother and Child…
Rebirth of the Holy Roman Empire…?
UK subjects: leave before it’s too late…
We are trying! We are trying! We have enough ghastly statists of our own to fight without the added repression and control brought by the Brussels mafia.
“Officially” Ron? Can you point us to an official explanation in these terms?
Such conspiracy theories are put about by a shadowy group that doesn’t want us to realise how difficult it is to run a really effective conspiracy–and whose plans would fall apart if we knew what they were up to.
Belle, you said/asked:
“So you’re saying the EU cannot ever be a coherent identity, even by force? But wouldn’t you have said the same thing about the USSR?”
That’s exaclty what I’m saying. Which is why force will be required, eventually, to keep the inevitable assertion of national identity in check. (ANyone who doubts my thesis here can just read the latest headlines on the Berlusconi-Schroeder flap. Cosmopolitanism for thee, but no for me, seems to be the prevailing European delusion.) It’s my personal theory on why the EU is a recipe for general European war, which I’ve expressed here before.
No one will be willing to die for that “European” identity, ever, and that’s the real measure of its authenticity to my mind. Similarly, the Czechs were never really Soviets, the entire premise of which was an ideological cover for Russian continental supremacy. My hope is that we won’t see a repeat of Hungary, 1956. If we do, there’s little chance it will end even so well as that, which is a depressing thought.
Kodiak–
I have to admit to being a little muddled as to your point, but I can assure you that by looking around this forum you’ll find that I’m not in any meaningful sense “alone” in my criticism. As I am an outsider to Europe, what transpires there is of humanitarian as well as strategic interest to me. America was born out of the European Enlightenment, and I’ll be sad to witness the rejection of our ideals by the very people who ought to be their guardians. I suppose after 1914, that lack of optimism was bound to snowball.
But my, what a telling choice for an anthem! Isn’t it interesting to ponder that the “Ode to Joy” could never be written today? That the West’s sense of itself is so unsteady that such a hymn would be unthinkable to the post-modern mind? And isn’t it also a bit fascinating that the Ode hearkens to a time before Europe stopped believing in the ideal that were the cauldron for that most optimistic of symphonies? I find it endlessly intriguing that Europse must dig desperately into its past for an affirmation of its present possibilities. It is a work of art from a time when the underlying assumptions of the European Union would have been incomprehensible to Europeans.
There is a lesson somewhere in that, I think.
The American nation was born out of people who (for the most part voluntarily) gave up their old racial/ethnic/national attachments in order to join a new American experiment based, not on race/ethnicity, but on adherence to common ideals. Because they were mostly volunteers, the “melting pot” worked like a charm for a couple of hundred years. (The current “diversity” idiocy is undoing the melting pot, to potentially disastrous results, but that is another rant).
The EU will not be able to emulate this to create a truly integrated Europe because the individual peoples of Europe have shown little willingness to give up their ethnic/racial/national identities. The elites of various countries may or may not have embraced this idea, but I seriously doubt that the mass of Germans, English, Polish, etc. citizens are eager to leave their former identiities behind to become “Europeans” first and last, rather than only incidentally.
In some ways, the ludicrous motto reflects the impossibility of achieving a “United States of Europe” that has a primarily European identity. On the other hand, this impossibility does not bode well for the long-term success of the current version of the EU project. By centralizing power in a way that does not match the identity of the various peoples who will be ruled, they are likely to create something rather like an empire with disgruntled provinces, rather than a functional union.
T. Hartin,
Your point about national identities within the EU may be well-founded, though there are plenty of multi-national states among the existing members, never mind in Europen history. But I submit the melting- pot vision of the US (early 20th century) is a more recent invention even than the nation-state (late 18th). The founding fathers of the US were British colonial gentlemen building a new republic for people like themselves.
Another exceptionally erudite Samizdata thread (are we all former academicians?).
A couple of extra thoughts I’d like to try on you all.
1) If the EU has any capacity for innovation, why reach back to the classical age for an anthem? I was a big fan of the “Three colors” trilogy in the 90s (New Europe, of course) which takes as its starting point the death of a composer in the midst of finishing just such a piece of music. Was Kieslawski THAT prescient?
2) The essential point about the EU at this point in time is that all parties PRESUME an end of history time frame: this is just a mopping up exercise really. The economy, political system, social fabric, etc. are treated like so many perpetual motion machines. If any of these break down, the whole thing is knackered. This is the danger of the exercise, it’s FRAGILITY (witness the ridiculous clamor over a few offhand remarks by Italians about Germany).
3) America, for all the talk of distinct communities, remains for now a vibrant melting pot. The problem today is whether it is now time to temporarily stem the tide of immigrants to allow for absorption–or if this has become impossible in an age of political correctness. The other danger I perceive is in the creation (really for the first time) of a set of priveleges granted to more or less distinguishable groups based on their color, gender, etc. For all the world this looks like a superimposition of “ancient rights” that never before existed here. The right to special consideration when applying to schools, for jobs, what have you.
Excellent comments, but there is one point in Sage’s analysis I doubt – the fear of violence and war.
The EU is a lofty utopian ideal, of the kind of impractical and impossible nonesense that lefty intellectuals love so much. The EU is just a lot of words and intentions and little substance. It is bound to crumble under it’s inner contradictions and remain a pious fiction and a dead carcass.
There is one thing I don’t see there – a tendency to violence and murderous methods – like the USSR. No, the EUrocrats are fools, but not violent ones.
The EU will disintegrate into irrelevance, but I don’t see Franco-German divisions marching across the channel to subdue perfidious Albion.
Since the EU framework isn’t contributing to the wellbeing of the people, but, over the long run, hindering it – people are going to opt out or ignore EU diktats, and nobody is going to prevent that by force. The USSR was maintained by a horrendous amount of brute force, but it survived barely 70 years, and it crumbled because it hindered the wellbeing of it’s people.
Maybe, under popular pressure the EU will turn more liberal in the distant future ? Who knows ?
I agree with Jacob. I don’t think that the current European elite have that kind of belligerence in them. When the balloon does go up, there may be a certain amount of bloodshed on the ground but not directed by the enarques who will, most likely as not, grab whatever goodies they can and piss off to some tropical tax haven.
Guy (Herbert),
The best I can do at the moment is quote from Chapter 2 of “The Principality and Power of Europe” by Adrian Hilton (foreword by Lord Tonypandy, Speaker of the House of Commons 1976-83) originally ISBN 0-9518386-2-8, revised version now available.
Click here for other excerpts
_________
Roman Catholic imagery is endemic in Europe, and has been wholeheartedly embraced by the European government. The design of the European flag was inspired by the halo of 12 stars around pictures of the Madonna, and appears prominently on the Council of Europe stained-glass window in Strasbourg Cathedral. The window was unveiled to the world on 11th December 1955, coinciding with the Roman Catholic feast of the Immaculate Conception.
The Flag Institute (an organisation which provides documentation and research on flags) has examined the evolution of the Council of Europe flag. Its director Dr William Crampton confirms a report that Leon Marchal, the then secretary-general of the Council, said:
‘It’s wonderful that we have got back to the Introit of the new Mass of the Assumption. It’s the corona stellarum duodecim (the crown of the 12 stars) of the Woman of the Apocalypse.’
Dr Crampton goes on to state:
‘It was Marchal, the supreme partisan of the Virgin Mary, who suggested the number 12.’
He also mentions a magazine article on the flag’s design, which confirmed:
‘No-one can deny that under these symbols Catholics recognise the presence of the infinitely merciful Queen of Peace in Christ.’ (Mediatrice et Reine, 1973)
When the European Union was expanded to 15 nations, The European Newspaper ran an article (European, 14-20th December 1995) responding to those who had expected the flag’s design to incorporate 15 stars – one star for each state – similar to the flag of the United States of America. It was confirmed that the 12 gold stars on a blue background were inspired by a picture of ‘Our Lady’ in Strasbourg, and that they were constant as they were drawn from the 12th chapter of the book of Revelation.
In the EU’s own publication Europe’s Star Choice, the flag’s inspiration is explained under the chapter heading ’12 Forever’. It is also stated that Strasbourg is a city which symbolises the dream of Franco-German integration – the heart of the Empire of Charlemagne.
It is also concerning, though some may dismiss it as trivially amusing, that a Roman Catholic Englishman (unnamed in “Rotten Heart of Europe”, Bernard Connolly, Faber & Faber, 1995) sent a letter to Jacques Delors, with the suggestion of dedicating the European Union to the ‘Blessed Virgin Mary’. He had presumably noted that Delors had been responsible for promoting the European flag, with its unmistakable Marian symbolism showing a circle of 12 stars on a blue background.
The member of Delors’s private office responsible for the Commission President’s relations with the Catholic Church replied that the suggestion was gratefully received, but that the President did not feel that it was within his authority to respond affirmatively. Was this because such a decision had to be placed before the European Council, or the Parliament, or even before the peoples of Europe in a referendum? Sadly, no. Elucidation came as the President stated that he would make the suggestion known to the Holy Father. If, ‘after prayerful consideration’, the Holy Father considered it appropriate, Delors would do everything he could to implement it.
The 20 pence coin of the British colony Gibraltar, issued by Parliament and approved by the Queen, bears an engraving of Mary crowned ‘Queen of Heaven’ and titled ‘Our Lady of Europa’. The head of the Queen on the other side is simply titled ‘Elizabeth II Gibraltar’, without her usual titles of D.G. REG. F.D. – Queen by the Grace of God, Defender of the Faith.
Anthem: Der Steuersong by Elmar Brandt
Motto (courtesy of Sam Ward): “Your EUniqueness will be added to our own”
The EU also needs an official animal. The US has the eagle, Russia the bear, China the dragon, France, Germany, and Belgium the weasel 🙂 Any ideas for the official EU critter?
T. Hartin,
“The American nation was born out of people who (…) gave up their old racial/ethnic/national attachments in order to join a new American experiment based, not on race/ethnicity, but on adherence to common ideals”
I guess “people” doesn’t include US citizens of African descent.
——
“Because they (THE US PEOPLE) were mostly volunteers (…)”
I imagine “they” doesn’t comprehend neither Black people nor Amerindians.
——
” (…) the “melting pot” worked like a charm for a couple of hundred years”
The KKK was actually very charming & so were the Indian wars (not to mention 1942 citizens of Nippon ancestry & present-day Muslims).
——
“The EU will not be able to emulate this (…)”
You’re right. She surely never will.
——
“(…) the individual peoples of Europe have shown little willingness to give up their ethnic/racial/national identities”
Anything wrong with that?
——
“By centralizing power in a way that does not match the identity of the various peoples who will be ruled, they are likely to create something rather like an empire with disgruntled provinces, rather than a functional union”
You seem to be a fair-balanced expert on Europe.
Rome was not built in one day.
So far, Europe did match the identity of the various peoples, of which none decided to step out. Since it is a collectivity of free States that freely decided to create a free Union, the “empire” is just a by-product of your fertile imagination, & the “provinces” are all independent States enjoying full UN-membership.
France is not Texas & will never be.
Spain is so much more than California.
Illinois, Colorado & Florida combined will never match The Netherlands.
Jacob,
“The EU is a lofty utopian ideal, of the kind of impractical and impossible nonesense that lefty intellectuals love so much”
The EU is actually something existing, working & so much successful that libertarian intellectuals take the pain to post thousands of bitter complaints.
——
“The EU is just a lot of words and intentions and little substance”
Like the Euro for instance?
Who knows about the pound existing at all?
——
“No, the EUrocrats are fools, but not violent ones”
Otherwise feel free to call Amnesty International.
——
“The EU will disintegrate into irrelevance, but I don’t see Franco-German divisions marching across the channel to subdue perfidious Albion”
The EU is so much disintegrated that she’s going to integrate new members in 2004.
As for the UK, I can swear NO ONE on the Continent cares if they join or leave the UE. It’s not our problem. It’s yours.
——
“Since the EU framework isn’t contributing to the wellbeing of the people (…)”
What is it contributing to then?
Can you develop please?
——
“Maybe, under popular pressure the EU will turn more liberal in the distant future ? Who knows ?”
Well, apparently, you don’t.
An overwhelming majority of all the citizens of any European people (is the UK European?) WANT the Welfare State & loathe the Weltanschauung you just can dream about.
It’s Zeitgeist.
Alan,
“Any ideas for the official EU critter?”
The French cockerel with fangs??
Kodiak don’t Dowdify my comments. Misrepresenting through selective quotation is best done when the original quotation is not sitting right there on the page for anyone to read.
I wrote:
“The American nation was born out of people who (for the most part voluntarily) gave up their old racial/ethnic/national attachments in order to join a new American experiment based, not on race/ethnicity, but on adherence to common ideals.
You quoted:
“The American nation was born out of people who … gave up their old racial/ethnic/national attachments in order to join a new American experiment based, not on race/ethnicity, but on adherence to common ideals.”
In order to make a cheap shot:
“I guess “people” doesn’t include US citizens of African descent.”
Note that the part conveniently emliminated by Kodiak is exactly the part that addresses the fact that not everyone came voluntarily.
Kodiak’s other cheap shot, relating to Indians and blacks, also conveniently overlooks the fact that I said Americans were MOSTLY volunteers.
As to the KKK, etc., proving that the melting pot didn’t work, I would only say that the KKK were, ultimately, marginal, and didn’t really do much to stem the flow of immigrants or prevent immigrant assimilation.
Kodiak, I wouldn’t get too smug about reaching back to the WWII era to prove the superiority of the Europeans in dealing with ethnic minorities. The Americans, to our eternal shame, may have locked up our Japanese residents, but at least we didn’t gas them and shovel them into ovens.
The leech.
T. Hartin,
I did indeed not bother to read carefully the text between brackets that I deliberately deleted as I was quoting your sentence, thus misrendering the accurate meaning of what you said.
That was a big mistake.
I really feel sorry for that & ask you to excuse me for any inconvenience I may have caused to you.
Flat apologies.
Thanx for telling me.
Jacob–
I certainly hope you’re right. I would be perfectly content to see my prediction fail. We’ll see.
Good thread all around, people.