That's a non-sequitur. It's probable that EU subsidies to non € countries have forestalled the financial dire straits afflicting the PIIGS -- all of which are stuck using the euro.
Socialism is the dominant political creed in Europe for the last 100 years, didn't hurt them in the 20th century.
That point is also highly debatable. Is Europe stronger, or in a better position now, than it was before WWI, vis-à-vis the rest of the world? It seems to me the US, Russia, (and China, if you believe the League of Wishful) have eclipsed the unadventurous and priggish Europeans. They suffered from their own miscalculations and appear to be suffering again based on the same stubborn inability to adapt.
This is a very good point. What is "globalization" in a world which utilizes several different economic and social models? It appears to be the EU vision on a global, rather than regional scale. This reminds me of bankers worldwide, in 2007, who sought to socialize the risk (spread it across the population) and personalize the reward (secure it in their pockets). Globalization hucksters are equally disgraceful, whether they try to veil their ambition in climate change, poverty, or flimsy regional unions like the EU or ASEAN. "Just hand over your wealth, and we'll fix the fabricated emergency."Globalisation is the problem - and globalism isn't Socialism, more akin to Capitalism.
Absolutely.Capitalism/Globalisation has encouraged the transfer of wealth from the poorest to the richest, unsurprisingly the poor follow the money ...
I'm not sure anyone is trying to destroy it, it's shaking itself apart. Its leaders are pounding square pegs in round holes, and the confidence many countries had upon entering the club has turned poison. The Krauts hoodwinked Europe ... again.There are many reasons why the EU is struggling, but most will not disappear by destroying it.
We shall see.The issue is that although the EU is far from perfect, destroying it will probably cause more problems than it solves.