Turn it on in Settings › Safari to view this website.
This message will be pushed to the admin's iPhone instantly.
There has been a fight between the advocates of two different ideals from the beginning of the European Union. Which stance should it adopt: the classical-liberal vision or the socialist vision of Europe? FULL ARTICLE by Philipp Bagus
Konrad Adenauer was not a classical liberal. See my biography of Ludwig Erhard for evidence of how Adenauer opposed Erhard’s free market policies whenever it was politically convenient for him to do so. Hans=Peter Schwarz’s two volume biography of Adenauer also makes this abundantly clear.
Alfred C. Mierzejewski. Ludwig Erhard. A Biography. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2004.
Classic liberalism and progressivism (socialism) are as incompatible as oil and water. The two cannot coexist as the latter strangles classic liberalism. One must triumph over the other. Lets hope it is classic liberalism.
You analysis about the two visions for Europe is good… and tragical at the same time. It is as being obliged to choose between Plague & Cholera. This is the reason way that since decades it is also spoken in Europe about “The Third Way” !
It is also this “Third Way” that we are searching AND that we have found with 2 precise proposals : 1° Specifically observed in tha area “Scandinavia-Germanies-Benelux” : The Rhineland Social Model AND 2° a vision that try to promote social aspects TOGETHER with Free Entreprise.
We named it “Positive Capitalisms” and we present it on our website at the following adress : https://sites.google.com/site/gotlandalliance/positive-capitalisms
We are aware that both a very specifically Europeans and this is way we promote both together under the name of Gotland Alliance. On the other hand, we also intend to promote our “Third Way” soon with a more wordl-wide approach, under the name of NSCI : New Social-Capitalism International.
All exchanges of ideas and collaborations are very welcome. We speak Englisg, German, French & Dutch.
Best Regards from Hanseatic Flanders !
The GOTLAND ALLIANCE
Direct mail : Brandy.Hans@gmail.com
I could not avoid noticing that the socialists were able to form a “big tent”, accomodating all manner of socialists, from Marxists to conservative nationalists, from (some) Christian traditionalists to so called “anarchists”, in their pursuit of their toxic and vile goals of a centrally (mis)governed socialist empire of Europe, headquartered in Brussels.
The only thing that seems to unite them, when all is said and done, apart from a shared vision of a European superstate which can impose a totalitarian despotism on everyone (equally), is their hostility to private property, sound money, and freedom of trade and exchange, i.e. laissez-faire capitalism!
Why can’t we liberals (in the classic European sense) evolve similar, or even more extensive coalitions, especially when vicory for one faction need not come (indeed MUSTN’T come) at the expense of differently minded people? If totalitarians can discover ways to unify ‘left’ and ‘right’ for their thoroughly noxious goals, certainly WE ought to be able to work much better than they have, with many different people and schools of thought, toward advancement of shared liberty,peace and prosperity!
PEACE AND FREEDOM!!
David K. Meller
I see only one vision for EU, and it’s not the classical-liberal one. Most of people in Europe are hardcore-statists, and that’s why EU is and will be a statist project – and a reason why there will be statism even if this recession will be the end of EU.
Why Did The Socialists Shape The European Union?
According to the regression theorem of intervention much of the disruption of the European economy can be traced back to the economic terrorism generated by the inflationists in control of the world reserve currency. Talk about crimes against humanity!
Your third way IS poisonous socialism-lite that will end washed-up and tyranical like every other form of socialism tried before it.
I feel sorry for you because human beings cooperating freely and voluntarily is somehow something that disgusts you. This is probably fruit of your own arrogance because you think “your plan” is somehow better but it’s just violence or threats of violence against others.
Just like everything else.
Well, to be fair, Adenauer was comparatively free-market when considering the German economy at the time. Erhard was undoubtedly more consistent and grounded in free-market thinking but the difference between them diminishes when placing figures like Mitterand on the spectrum as Mr. Bagus had done.
Thank you very much for this coherent and uncomplicated analysis. (It seems socialists and others who tend towards centralised control like complications and mystifications, and true liberals love clarity and simplicity!)
Indeed, the liberal vision of Europe is slipping away, which is both sad and frightening. And a great pity because such a course is not necessary.
All content Copyright Mises Economics Blog
Powered by WordPress + WPtouch 1.9.41