[Arthur Gordon Pym]

Originally Posted by Mynydd

If this question arises from the comment made by some, that opposing to a form of Pan-Europeanism or euro-centralism equals isolationism, then in my opinion that is not isolationism.

Yes, let's concentrate on concrete contents, rather than on mere words, than can somtimes prove misleading.

Originally Posted by Mynydd

The model of Europe should be worked on a project of confederation of sovereign nations, based on a symbiotic relation between the nation-states and the confederation. Such a confederation should exist to ensure the protection and preservation of the national identities and their interests in a wider global framework.

It is a good idea, a confederation of sovereign nations, but I would like to make some additional remarks.

There should be no meddling into interior businesses of individual nations (like pressures because of the situation with "human rights" and similar); no forcing of free trade, meaning that nations-countries should be free to choose whether or not allow the import of these or those goods, no meddling into internal economic policy of nations (like agricultural quotes and similar); no constraints of the "free movement of people and goods" inside Europe, meaning that every country should be free to decide whom to receive and whom not; the same goes for acquiring property for foreigners; no interfering with the internal political system of every individual country (republic, monarchy, democracy, corporativism...); every country guards its own intra-European borders; every country would have is own currency.

What should be common? Some basic cooperation in guarding the external frontiers of Europe; a sort of international military force for the purpose of defence from external threats (not a unified European army; individual countries should retain their own armed forces); a coordination of foreign policy towards the rest of the world (but individual countries would retain their own foreign policy as well, intra-European embassies, as well as embassies in the countries of the rest of the world and would be free to make arrangements with extra-European countries, on condition that those agreements do not harm all-European interests).

A language in which all these international bodies would function should be chosen. Maybe many of you will laugh at this proposal, deeming it totally unrealistic (perhaps it indeed is), but I think Latin would be the best choice (of course, all nations would retain their own languages in the internal usage, I mean only for these international bodies). A true common European spirit could be better expressed in that language than in any other.

At the same time, I tend to see the current EU as absolute evil, a blight to Europe, that is ruining the European civilization steadily. My opinion is that it must be dismantled in order for Europe to survive.

Maybe once the EU (when it was yet EEC) had a certain positive role, in loosening the tensions among European nations that resulted from the biggest carnage in European history (1939-1945), but today it has degenerated into a dangerous and venomous cocktail of Freemasonic Jacobinism ("Constitution") and American-style globalism (economistic way of thinking, power of megacoroporations, a sign that EU is more and more resembling a kind of caricature of the USA). Not to mention the immigration and multicult as an inevitable concomitant effects of the evils I just listed...

What is more, this hypertrophied beaurocratic organization, which is ostensibly trying to unify Europe, may be the agent of its disintegration, but the worst form of disintegration. Below the surface of faceless and uniform beaurocratic Eden there is a host of small particularities and local conflicts teeming all over Europe. It means that EU could implode like USSR once did or even worse, like Yugoslavia did, with one million ethnic conflicts and the disintegration of many present-day states. Imagine that, coupled with all those immigrant non-European communities, which wouldn't all of a sudden disappear. Europe would be disintegrated into many tribes, many of them Arabic or Berber speaking, others speaking European languages, but it would nevertheless start to resemble, say, Papua New Guinea. It would end up as protectorate of China or who knows whom else...

You think I'm a kind of prophet of doom and gloom? No, I am trying just to figure out some of the possible scenarios that could result from losing European identities form the bearocratice uniformity increasingly imposed by Brussels.