Paladin Solo
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
You'd piss off plenty of white people, though, calling them Asians. Might as well call Egyptians *gasp* "niggas."
Turkey is not European! Is too! Is not! Is too!
- Thread starter Mani
- Start date
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
You'd piss off plenty of white people, though, calling them Asians. Might as well call Egyptians *gasp* "niggas."
Funny how no-one mentioned how Israel is in the Eurovision Song Contest.
Oh well.
Personally, I believe Turkey has just as much right to join Europe as, say, Cyprus. The Anatolian peninsula has been an integral part of European/Western history for ages, and developments there have helped shape the very identity of Western civilisation. Even when the Ottomans took over in the 15th century, they played a very important part in political, technological and, to a lower degree, cultural developments in Europe, up to the 21st century. Politically, they have done much effort to align themselves with the EU in the last decade, and to rebuff them from membership would not only be very hypocrite, but undermine the westernizer faction in Turkey, which could have unwanted results. The only reason not to consider Turkey part of Europe seems to be religion, but in the political entity of the European Union religion plays no part whatsoever.
As a matter of fact, I do not see a reason to rebuke any nation from EU membership if it is politically and economically compatible. If Iceland were to apply, why not? If, after Turkey, and after some changes, Armenia were to apply - why not? The world will only get better from it.
Let's centralise first, though.
Oh well.
Personally, I believe Turkey has just as much right to join Europe as, say, Cyprus. The Anatolian peninsula has been an integral part of European/Western history for ages, and developments there have helped shape the very identity of Western civilisation. Even when the Ottomans took over in the 15th century, they played a very important part in political, technological and, to a lower degree, cultural developments in Europe, up to the 21st century. Politically, they have done much effort to align themselves with the EU in the last decade, and to rebuff them from membership would not only be very hypocrite, but undermine the westernizer faction in Turkey, which could have unwanted results. The only reason not to consider Turkey part of Europe seems to be religion, but in the political entity of the European Union religion plays no part whatsoever.
As a matter of fact, I do not see a reason to rebuke any nation from EU membership if it is politically and economically compatible. If Iceland were to apply, why not? If, after Turkey, and after some changes, Armenia were to apply - why not? The world will only get better from it.
Let's centralise first, though.
John Uskglass
Venerable Relic of the Wastes
Yeah, you would want that, Commie.Jebus said:
Centralized ! = Better.
The Antilles are not just a part of the Netherlands, they're Dutch colonies, which is a very important distinction to make because it changes a lot of things. The same goes for all of your other examples. But it doesn't go for Istanbul.Mani said:
Your point being that because it has been under the jurisdiction of three different entities (Greece, Eastern Roman Empire and Ottomans/Turkey) it.....
What the hell is your point?
No, I'm not. I'm saying that people did not view them as part of Europe, I'm also saying that there is no saying such definite things about the boundaries of Europe.
Yes, and before that people viewed a river delta as the most logical choice.
Get my point?
John Uskglass said:
Does that mean that conversely Centralized = worse?
John Uskglass
Venerable Relic of the Wastes
No, of course not, I am neither a Confederate or an Anarchist. I think the only way the EU will ever work is if itKharn said:
A) Says fuck you to national boundaries
but does NOT
B) Centralize all European affairs into Brussels or wheverthefuck.
A loose federation of semiautonomous regions bound by a desire for social and economic growth tolerated by a respect for equality and tradition would seem to be THE ONLY way to do it. Making it one big France would just result in every nation in the EU saying "Fuck it".
No. Keeping the EU decentralised as it is now will only prolong the lumbering, slow and decisionless bureaucracy it can be now.
Sander said:
The point is just because the Ottomans conquered some land in Europe 650 years ago doesn't make Turkey part of Europe.
They viewed the delta as the political border Europe, which has no effect on the geographical border.
Also if those countries werent part of Europe or Asia, what were they a part of?
Jebus said:
Only Paneuropean activities should be centralised.
Again: what is your point? Istanbul has always been a part of European culture, especially before the 1500s. And I never said that because the Ottomans conquered it, it was part of Europe.Mani said:
Eblergh. Am I not expressing myself clearly enough? They viewed the river delta as the *geographical border*, and thinking of it like that was influenced by political ideas.
Mani said:
That isn't the only reason why it is to be considered part of Europe either.
Plus, 'conquered some land' is an understatement, and '650 years ago' is incorrect.
[/quote]Mani said:
Duh.
More stuff should become pan-European, that's my point. Defense, foreign affairs, police, etc.
Only culture, sports, education and the likes should stay a national affair, IMHO.
Jebus said:
That's funny, because in the current EU the EU involves itself in pan-European sport events, education structures (BA-MA, anyone?), and pretty much everything EXCEPT policing and defense.
The current EU is such a monstrosity of bureaucracy that the only way to actually make it what it was supposed to be that I see is to completely dissolve it and build it from the ground up. The project itself, as it stands now, is hopeless.
Jebus said:
The land I'm talking about is the Turkish bit that is currently in Europe, that is not much land. Sure they conquered a lot more but they lost all of it again too.
Like I said earlier in this thread, the Ottomans occupied Constantinople is 1453, which is aprox. 650 years ago.
*edit* sorry 550 years ago, my bad.
Paladin Solo
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
Turkey is on two continents, get over it. Unless you're idea of a European is a white western European, I see no point to your arguing.
In either case, your argument is pointless. Hawaii is not continentally part of North America, but that didn't stop Americans from annexxing it. So why can't you understand how Turkey might one day be part of the European Union?
In either case, your argument is pointless. Hawaii is not continentally part of North America, but that didn't stop Americans from annexxing it. So why can't you understand how Turkey might one day be part of the European Union?
John Uskglass
Venerable Relic of the Wastes
I agree for the most part.
Yeah, because decentralized systems tend to be so more bureauocracy and less efficient then loose federations.
What I'm suggesting is not decentralization, but altercentralization. Give power to the independent regions and cities of the EU, allow them to make local decisions rather then have some absurd boundaries mark the difference between national governments. Then have the EU function as a trading block and international force rather then as a massive crypto-Leninist mess.
Atomic Cowboy
It Wandered In From the Wastes
This whole debate reeks of the Huntington mythos.
Huntington was a hack who had no idea what he was talking about. His "civilisations" are nonsensical concepts, obvious to anybody who has done the slightest bit of world history. The guys a joke, and very much to blame for many of the problems we see in the world today.
See, his book, Clash of Civilisations, was a self fullfilling prophecy. After he published it in '93 he became very influencial in the top levels of american government. His paradigm of inevitable conflict was adopted by the top decision makers and it became true. But if you look at the reality of the situations, actually dig down and see what countries are like, then the idea of talking about an "Islamic civilisation," or a "Christian/European cvilisation" is idiotic.
Compare the Balkans, Britain, and Utah; these are all the same civ, eh? How about Iraq, Pakistan, and eastern Africa? I'd really like to punch this guy.
If you don't know what I'm talking about look up Samuel Huntington. His ideas have become so widespread that most of us speak in his language without knowing who he is, but there fundamentally flawed, self serving, and destructive. Here are a couple wiki links which are much kinder than he deserves.
Huntington was a hack who had no idea what he was talking about. His "civilisations" are nonsensical concepts, obvious to anybody who has done the slightest bit of world history. The guys a joke, and very much to blame for many of the problems we see in the world today.
See, his book, Clash of Civilisations, was a self fullfilling prophecy. After he published it in '93 he became very influencial in the top levels of american government. His paradigm of inevitable conflict was adopted by the top decision makers and it became true. But if you look at the reality of the situations, actually dig down and see what countries are like, then the idea of talking about an "Islamic civilisation," or a "Christian/European cvilisation" is idiotic.
Compare the Balkans, Britain, and Utah; these are all the same civ, eh? How about Iraq, Pakistan, and eastern Africa? I'd really like to punch this guy.
If you don't know what I'm talking about look up Samuel Huntington. His ideas have become so widespread that most of us speak in his language without knowing who he is, but there fundamentally flawed, self serving, and destructive. Here are a couple wiki links which are much kinder than he deserves.
Kharn said:
My point. Apart from the BA-MA stuff, which was pretty damn well needed, they waste their time on way too much stuff of which the only usefull point is to make them more popular with the unwashed French and Dutch masses.
Also, what sport events does the EU involve itself in? Not correcting you, just curious. I don't know of any, that's fo'sho.
Kharn said:
That's a pretty big detour. 't Is just about changing priorities.
Nami said:
Homie, that all doesn't matter. No matter how much Turkish land is beyond the Bosporus, Turkey is way more part of Europe than it ever was of the 'Middle East'. It has always been involved in European history, from the Greek empire over the Roman empire, to the Crusades, the European Early Modern trade wars, the Russian expansionism, the Napoleon age, up to World War I and the Cuban Missile crisis. And they're a part of European history and economy today. Hey, they still control more land in Europe than, say, Luxemburg or Montenegro. And quite frankly, saying they should not compete in European music contests or join the pan-euopean political union sounds of racism and xenofobia. I'd like to see some arguments rising above the level of 'OMG they are far away' before I will ever take you seriously, thankyouverymuch.
CCR said:
Europe deserves to be more than a trade block.
Jebus said:
They do not make themselves very popular with French and Dutch masses.
The EU is in fact involved directly or indirectly to any and all sports events, but I'll admit they generally have a hands-off stance.
Jebus said:
I don't think it is. Knowing the EU's mechanics as well as I do (which is still fairly limited), I'd say the problem is very deep, in the fact that the EU as a body is only peripherally about democratic organisms, and seems to be tooled as a body towards the concept of bureaucracy over democracy.
That's a very ingrained problem, that goes deeper than changing priorities. The EU's extreme lean towards right-wing neo-liberalism despited the fact that most of the EU is left-wing is a matter of changing priorities. It's buro > demo is not just priorities, it's about base philosophy.
John Uskglass
Venerable Relic of the Wastes
Now who is the Fascist?
John Uskglass said:
Does that make me fascist?
Amazing.