PIN FOR CORRECTIONS: We had a bit of a mixup in the writing/editing process. This crisis took place between 1965-1966. So add one year to whatever it says in the top left. Whoops!
Just what I needed today, a comprehensive video about an EEC-crisis; as a political student, this is hot chocolate on a cold winter evening. It's making me wonder whether to pursue a career in becoming a Eurocrat, or a national bureaucrat. Seems like Europe's dilemma holds true even at the individual level. It might be more my bias seeping out, but RU-vid needed a high quality, (social?) liberal minded and democratic confirmatory channel. Thank you a lot for putting in the effort, I hope this is only the start!
he was a lil stinker about giving the US credit for liberating France and giving up their colonies after the war, directly causing communism in Vietnam and US intervention there a la China/USSR in Korea
So 2 tiers of European communities seems compelling. A federal tier for countries who prefer a better European integration and a confederation tier for countries who prefer national sovereignty but still adhere to European identity.
As a Brit, though I can't say I speak for most people in my country given the divisiveness of the issue, would much rather have a confederacy where sovereignty ultimately lies with nation states. A toothless EU is no problem for me, if one minister blocks a motion what stops all the other countries implementing the policy on a national level anyway and leaving the other alone. I am still skeptical of the two tier Europe idea though it does seem promising.
Thanks so much! If you want to learn more, check out the core source on our sources page. It's a really good breakdown of the whole thing in much greater detail
I think it would be interesting to compare EU integration to the American constitutional convention and how the Constitutional order evolved up until about Reconstruction.@@spectacles-dm
Your channel is criminally under watched. Im sure you will see a future of success mr spectacles. Im a big fan! Ive wanted to make a channel like yours for years now. But youve made it and its beautiful, engaging and entertaining all in one!
Interestingly enough, the modern governance of the US is weighted much more towards the federal government than was originally intended. This conflict within the EU may be the thing that actually results in the preservation of the European project. Slowing down decision making at the highest level ensures that only the broadest coalition can impose decisions on the majority. Republicanism requires the protection of the rights of the political minority.
Every country having a veto is a dysfunctional and makes outside interference easy. Right now Hungary is the biggest problem(Poland has pretty much returned to the fold with the war in Ukraine) What it reminds me is how the Polish Commonwealth ended with the Russian empire buying a few nobles to use their liberum veto. Effectively making the state unable to do anything and then being partitioned during the 1700s. That being said, I also don't think a simple majority voting is good either. This would leave many smaller countries with special circumstances(like the nordic countries) in a very bad situation. Finland and Sweden can not have the same agricultural demands as Poland and Bulgaria. Just the climate is too different. Maybe a 2/4 or 3/4 supermajority vote needed would be better in making decisions.
DeGaulle is a perfect example of why you should never, ever let a wartime leader do the job in peacetime. DeGaulle was in love with the kind of overarching power that a wartime leader has. That, and he was a jerk of the first water. Arrogant, egotistical and fully convinced that only he knew the right answers. There might also have been a lingering resentment that France had to be liberated from the German occupation. Sometimes, that kind of rescue generates hostility rather than gratitude.
Oooh this is going to be an exciting video Ok this was a topic i have never seen in a video and I love it. The topic is one that I would like to know about the EU's history as an institution. Yes the division within the EU with the hungary and poland tieup is concerning and from this video i know where it came from.
Thank you so much for this video! Comprehensive, in-depth, eye pleasing and an intriguing topic :) Can't wait to see more! I was sent here by Hoog, another RU-vidr talking EU topics. Can definitely recommend their videos after you have watched all on this channel!
This makes me wonder if the US would be in a similair state, were it not for the strong federalist reconciliation after the civil war that applied constitutional rights to state law
Great point! There's a reason we closed the video with a reference to Europe's "division against itself." Remind you of any particular speech by any particular president?
By that point the US was already much more centralized than what the EU was before (even pre-Civil War). Also, political bargaining in the US is still very much based around regional/"state" interests.
one big difference between then and now is, that then, the "unhappy" one was a net contributor and now, the "unhappy" ones are net beneficiaries of the EU. And even the example of Brexit (the one recent net contributor unhappy one) show the weakness of the argument for being out of the Union... I highly doubt that Poland or Hungary... or Greece for that matter (ref to the after 2008 crisis), would really choose to leave, in a normal situation... here come populism, the bane of peoples real interest...
Good video. I would like to point two small caveats. It could be argued that De Gaulle and much of the French public along with wanting to preserve France's dominant status at the time was very afraid of Germany's power on the ECC one the best example was France's refusal for an embryonic common European Army this was due to concern that the West German army had reinstated nazy officers and soldiers in its ranks. Big no no for the French whose parliament rejected the proposal. Second De Gaulle was wary that further integration and federalization would lead to expansion of the EEC and less decision making power for France. Third and this for it's worth is more of an observation and personal beliefs. De Gaulle was right when it came to bureaucracy. Not necessarly in the sense that states should have strong power at the expanse of federalism but far more when it comes to a European comission that sometimes takes decision against the wishes of both the European Parliament and the various European people in the various states of the E.U. One of the most clear and blatant example was the appointment of Scott Fiona Morton Hill to the position of E.U comissioner to digital technology and big corporations like Facebook, Google, Amazon. This started a wave of protests in both E.U countries who were opposed to her nomination and all of the E.U parliament groups who were all opposed to her nomination due to her past work life as lawyer for these companies. Furthermore there were fears that due to her American nationality she would act in America's interests not the E.U's. To conclude I would say that even though I'm opposed to Poland and Hungary's use of the Veto to avoid having to follow the rule of law and separation of powers. I'm also opposed to the E.U in its current form because of the thousands of lobbyists and big businesses's influence on the EU institutions. Feel free to disagree with me.
The US was a federation before and after the Civil War. What you are talking about was the switch from the Articles of Confederation to the current Constitution.
The better approach to making the threat of renewed European division and war impossible would be to focus on evolving all member states into post national states with pluralistic, liberal democratic systems footed on immigration while there should be no EU super states, more subsidiarity and possibly also no more common currency.
Hoog is always recommending the right videos to satisfy my euro political infatuations. Also, France seems be historically hardline on many negotiations, wonder why
France always views itself as either a global superpower, or at least on the path to re-establishing itself as a global superpower. That leads to self-confidence and thinking they're the big guy. Secondly, French political culture is now unique in Europe in being highly highly adversarial. They're the only EU country (now that the UK left) that doesn't have any dose whatsoever of PR in its electoral system. Each side views its ideology as one of political struggle and compromise is seen as a bad word.
I just subscribed from your intro, but after watching, I have to applaud you. Your videos are amazing at both original and 2x speed (how i watch most videos). You are a good researcher and a great orator.
You should remove the timer from the bottom and the chapter format. Your videos arent that long and your an excellent storyteller. It makes it hard to get lost in the story when theres a timer at the bottom and youre interrupting the flow every 3 minutes
Appreciate the compliment and the input! Some viewers have said they love this - others not so much. It's hard to tell which way to go, but we'll always be experimenting.
The French title is "How Charles de Gaulle broke down Europe" Then it says "you're probably thinking, what a clickbait title! An empty chair?..." That makes no sense. I really hate video translations.
in 1964 France was only willing to discuss an agricultural budget. Today Imperialist Europe is bulldozing Dutch farms, cause nobody needs locally grown food.
Why have we mostly heard only about the European Common Market during all this in the US? This slant has been that the EU and the Eurozone was a natural organic outgrowth of the Common Market, rather than a long-standing plan to subvert and submerge national sovereignty in some United States of Europe which necessarily carries with it the same gigantism and obliteration of local self-rule as does our own united system of 50 entities which we increasingly learn are manipulated and bullied by a combination of unelected bureaucrats in Washington DC and an often ossified elected legislature which fails to move it all and when it does moves in lockstep under a dominant party passing massive 1000 to 10000 page legislative bills which most so-called Representatives either have not read or do not understand. And when the separate legislative houses in the competing political parties are in legitimate concert, we the people can count on an unelected administrative state to write intrusive regulations interpreting, limiting or exaggerating the regulatory reach. From over here it looks like the only reason that the UN works in any resistance to the tyranny of the majority is the veto power attained by the major Powers after WWII. This evolution of a Unified Europe seems to have progressed from a benign coalition with the implicit goal of resisting aggression and preventing War to the power-hungry monolith which did everything within its power to not bargain in good faith with an exiting United Kingdom and which supports a banking system imposing one-size-fits-all monetary policy which is almost Vie definition out of joint with a fiscal policies of the individual nations The EU looks more and more like a model for consensus-building in the imposition of a single point of control grid dominated by technocratic globalists
After rejecting the European Defence in 1954 which would have created it. All because French Médiocrité wanted to reaffirm France as a power with a little empire of its own
I really love your content, hopefully this feedback is useful: I clicked on this video because I know your channel and trust that the content will be interesting, but these vague titles don't really inspire engagement in my opinion, for people who aren't familiar with your channel I'm not sure they would be drawn to a video with a title that could mean almost anything and doesn't make itself clear as to what the subject matter is.
The EU was never intended to be a federation or to become a nation-state, it's remarkable to see how incredibly successful the EU has become and has indeed resulted in the longest period of peace between the members, in history. Comparisons with the USA or federal countries are not really relevant, the EU was and is a unique initiative as a union of sovereign states, there is nothing like it.
@@harryclennon6745 no, it's simply untrue to pretend that there has ever been any intention by a majority to want a EU federal state. It's just not true. Are there people who might have wanted it or still do? Yes, of course, but I prefer to focus my attention on actual EU policy, the Aqcuis and majority positions over the past 70 years. What I'm saying is: people should stop comparing the EU to a federal state or the USA, these comparisons are useless, ill-informed and fail to highlight the reasons and objectives of the EU's structures, policies and aims, for good and for worse.
@@JeffJeff-kh9kh Oh, please. Adenauer, Schuman and De Gasperi very clearly wanted a European federation - they stated it. To say that no one wanted it is a made-up lie
@@fra604 I very specifically have NOT said that no one wanted it, please don't put words in my mouth. Likewise, please refrain from calling me a liar, it's very unbecoming.
@@JeffJeff-kh9kh Fair, I was too aggressive. But at the beginning the overwhelming majority of the political elite was for a federation, even if there were currents against it
I am strongly against the notion of a European Federation or that the European institutions are what kept the continent out of conflict, but this is nonetheless a very well researched and informative video, thank you.
@@NoName-hg6cc The costs of war far outweigh any benefits, especially since we've given up the idea of glorious expansionism. And as for representation, the EU doesn't need dominance over its members for that.
Interestingly, I makes me think the exact opposite. Having a margin of manoeuvre for the countries of Europe may just be what is needed to keep them working together and not back out.
@@sotch2271 Well Europe isn't exactly known for just nicely cooperating. Don't get me wrong, I don't like everything about the UE. But keeping peace in Europe is one big benefit I see.
@@sotch2271 "Cooperating like it has been done for centuries" :)))))))))))))))) Do you realise that nation states have only existed since the 19th century and Europe has been at war for most of the time?
i dont like how videos get so many likes people are too kind these days so i dislike a video if a spot a single mistake to try somewhat even out the like to dislikes ratio you are 1 of many channels i am subbed to that i regularly dislike videos on@@spectacles-dm
