 Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder said Tuesday that Europe must choose between two futures: one as a politically united continent able to hold its own in a globalized economy and the other as an enfeebled trading bloc. In his first major speech since the collapse of talks late last week at a European Union summit, Schroeder said disagreement about Europe's future — not its stricken constitution or budget — was at the heart of the dispute. "The core question is: which Europe do we want? Do we want a united Europe capable of acting, a real political union ... or do we want to limit ourselves to being a large free-trade zone?"
| I'd say go with the large free trade zone. They've been trying the empire thing ever since Charlemagne, and it hasn't worked yet. Finland isn't Portugal. |
Schroeder said at the presentation of a book by a lawmaker from his Social Democratic Party. "I'm convinced ... we need a political union. Only a political union is able to practice solidarity," Schroeder said.
| That's making the assumption that "solidarity" — fine old Second International word that it is — is a good thing by definition. Pause and think about it, and it might not be the case. Cooperation implies working together for mutually desirable ends. Solidarity doesn't brook dissent. I'd rather be in a situation where I'm allowed to have an opinion, and I imagine most Europeans would, too. Cooperation ends when interests diverge, but solidarity applies across the board. Cooperation allows competition even while trying to achieve those mutual ends, and competition, that desire to do things better than the next guy, is what makes for innovation. Innovation is the stick that stirs the bottom of the pond and keeps it from getting stagnant. |
|