What even is Europe? 

Progression can get a tad bit tedious, but overall a good game.

Europe is an impossible mix of cultures which are generally incompatible in terms of planning and implementation styles.

Do you fully disagree with Realism as an International Relations Theory or simply Offensive Realism?

2:33 spealing of Chinese viewer`s biases, nice/interesting map of "Europe"

If this video was published 8 minutes ago, how is your comment 9 days old?

As another Chinese American, I agree. Not sure if its akin to modern nationalism, but there is a huge amount of pride engrained in Chinese culture atleadt when talking about others. One of the things that came out of taling with some of my other ABC friends is "you dont call everyone around you a barbarian unless you have very tall towers and very thick walls". A favorite ancedote is that when the British first tried to negotiate with the Qing, the Qing ambassador spoke to him in Latin.

You both better have a good VPN. Godspeed.

​@@deathmorphosis In Texas? What for?

@@deathmorphosis why would I need a VPN?

@@richyhu2042 It would appear as though he only perceived the "Chinese" part of your nationality.

I personally think the best time for a singluar "civilisation state" to develop would have been the Napoleonic era. After industrialisation global spaning imperial empires simply couldn't coexist on the continent.

I view their is philosophical differences especially militarily between Europe, and China even during the Roman rule. Which is that generals in Europe only get respect by waging war and securing the loyalty of their soldiers with war loot aka winning wars constantly. Meanwhile the most respected generals in China are the strategic masterminds able to use the vast resources of the empire to perform impossible feats. Essentially Europeans know war by doing it, where as China strategizes to contain/ Control war.

I agree with your views to the letter, the constant pressure in europe motivated constant progress and advancement which led to europe advancing its technology and helped it catch up eventually, while china instead got all cozy and aristocratic resulting in it stagnating dispite initially being at the forefront in technological advancement.

@@neroatlas9121 It's honestly not that simple imo. There are any number of reasons why dynasties fall and they're not all interrelated. For instance, the Song dynasty, which fell to the Mongols, was economically and culturally powerful but militarily weaker than most Chinese dynasties that came before it. This was because the founder of the dynasty explicitly suppressed the military because he himself was a general who overthrew his emperor and was afraid of the same thing happening to him. Then in referring to the Ming, they were the ones who overthrew Mongol rule but were inspired by the Mongols to be more despotic and autocratic than traditional Chinese dynasties would've been. There's also the fact that significant technological knowledge was lost during the collapse of the Han dynasty which set China back who knows how long. And then there's the Qing who actually were complacent, but they also set China back in a lot of other ways, mostly in the way they pitted ethnicities within China against each other to maintain Manchu rule over the majority Han population. Some civilizational characteristic of "complacency" or whatever is simply way too simplistic to explain historical events and trends and honestly it reeks of orientalism imo.

I also subscribe to the theory that the constant pressure of war in Europe was what drove a lot of its technological development. For much of history in that part of the world, you'd quickly be conquered by some neighbouring kingdom if you didn't keep up. Parts of Asia didn't have this and China often dominated the entire region to the point everyone was basically a subsidiary of China, so war was a bit less constant. Japan even has periods of history where basically nothing happens for a couple centuries because of isolationism and the fact that it isn't exactly easy to invade since it's an island and much further from the main continent than Britain. Nothing happening and being left alone for even a single century is just something you'd never see in much of European history. Japan only caught up technologically because they didn't want to fall behind the growing European powers as well as the fact some European powers actually helped them catch up.

>How is Europe In its 4th recession in a decade, thank you for asking

Eating bugs and going monke

" How long is europe?"

Nobody asks that question as if they did, it would lead to asking further questions that would dismantle their presuppositions and force them re-evaluate their beliefs. This is something people don't tend to do willingly.

I’ll do you one better, *why* even is Europe?

The Chinese will never miss a opportunity to call everybody except them backwards

Indeed

I don't think he forgot it, the same thing happened in the Roman empire.

@@raxit1337 No. Not in that extent and not in such pervasive manner. Spaniards or French don't say they are roman. Heck, even the arabs didn't go that far.

@@Kaiyanwang82 The roman empire collapsed ages ago, of course Spaniards or French don't say they are roman. those areas were latinised by the romans though, they had completely distinct cultures before.

One does not expect an unbiased opinion from a member of the nation that calls itself "the nation of the center" (zhong guo).

As someone from the UK, we do kinda look at you like that. Though, I doubt it's the same as what the Chinese guy was saying.

@@juliuskresnik198 yeah same…

@@LMB222 It sounds even more ridiculous because that Chinese person ignores both the failures of Qing and Maoist China.

Well what I tell people the world is better off with us here than without.

I knew he imagined Poland as a Federation in which Baltics, Belarus, Ukraine etc. are part of, with very high level of autonomy. But I didn't really know there was more to it.

the last time i heard the concept of intermarium (3 seas) mentioned was in a caspian report geopolitics video no idea it was formulated by pilsudski though

Rzeczpospolita Polska wiesz!

Unexpected Atatürk got me the same.

I read this comment the moment he mentioned him

Try saying it three times as fast.

@@greyghost2492 Ugly-crane urinal

Ukrainium

Uraine

@@greyghost2492 The second syllable for me is so hard, i think a frickative i do not know the term, its not too hard

Yeah, for 1. I can add that the contested area contained an important railroad junction connecting Prague and Moravia to Slovakia (one of the two existing at the time afaik), so it was an important strategic land for Czechoslovakia to obtain aside of the resource question. The capture of this junction was also given as a reason of the Polish annexation of the region in 1938 as it would, besides settling old disputes, improve Polish security in case of an invasion from the West.

@@patapax7033 That went well

Does that translate as The Republic of Two Nations?

@@xenamorphwinner7931 No, the direct translation of Rzeczpospolita is Republic, or Commonwealth. That's why the First Polish Republic is often referred to, as Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, or the Commonwealth of the Two Nations. The second one is commonly used in Poland (Rzeczpospolita Obojga Narodów)

@@jakubjaworski1593 Thanks

I don't understand the HR lady. Switzerland is in Europe...

@@arturodiazcoca7408 Yes, but it's painfully neutral. Switzerland isn't in the Union, so it doesn't quite have the same benefits people would get from living in a country that is part of the EU. Pretty sure they also developed their culture completely differently from their neighbors, but that could be wrong

@@RiverRina Painfully? Amazingly neutral

@@RiverRina what do you mean painfully lmao. They are the only sane ones who practice neutrality instead of warmongering because muh demucracy and europoor values are under threat lol.

@@RiverRina I would not call it completely different by any means, though by a quirk of history they managed to build a state and fierce national identity without basing it on language or really anything more than their security interests having pulled them together into a confederation. This has made Switzerland an inspiration for European Federalists in the past.

As a Chinese, the way I interpret such infatuations we have for Rome stem from this: a powerful centralized state with a well maintained governing apparatus, strong army, influential high culture and language, evokes parallels to our first golden age, the Qin-Han dynasties. This lionized imagery of a strong dynasty ruled over by wise emperors is praised and alluded to not only in political pieces of later dynasties, but also ingrained into our historical and literary traditions, the Chinese utopia, in a sense.

@@TheLivetuner lol I thought the ccp do alway with the mandate of heaven

@@TheLivetuner There was that feeling of nostalgia for the Roman Empire as well but as time has gone on sympathy for it has lowered, as historians have been more critical of them. Particularly how their empire conquering mirrors European imperialism. Rome as a society is looked back on more critically as the years go on.

@@khanhnguyen-tt3ff “The Mandate of Heaven” is a misleading English translation, as it was largely a secular idea represented using mystic language. It all comes down to honouring morality and political justification, there is really nothing religious about it in practice, thus the CCP isn't doing away with it entirely, just further eliminating whatever remains of the mysticism and the characteristic tied with dynastic structure.

@@TheLivetuner > “well maintained governing apparatus” Ehh…

Ha its questonable. Until Nixon US were for EU, after him they realize EU could be a competitor to their economy and also an ally with its own will. Many problems exist in relationships between us. Look at the videos history of eu american ralations by TEPSA I think and another why are eu us relations broken

european wars gave america 50% of the world's resources in the 1950s lol. the population didn't like the wars but the ever expansionist govt sure did.

America was never "forced" into any war. In the first world war, america wasn't willing to deal with the compromises that were imposed by a major european land war. They didn't want to limit trade and civilian movement between continents. The second world war was mainly a self-fulfilling prophecy imposed by US management of the situation in Asia. Both wars also had major anglophile factions that were very influential in the entry of America, especially in the first world war.

Wow,he wrote that in 1947.

@@tefky7964 Yeah, incredibly accurate. Well except for the third threat: he predicted that Vatican will oppose EU as well. But as far as I see, Vatican doesn't give a crap. To be fair, Orwell wrote it before the 2nd Vatican council, which modernized the church and made it less political.

Only, that the European Union that was founded at the end, is 1984.

@@Posiman Because what we got as European Union, is not the European Union born out of the wish to have stabile peace. It uses its name, but it is the second option: 1984!

Amazingly accurate.

That's fair. They do both start with a b after all

It is because thye're borht bleue

Honestly i would never agree to such a thing as Frenchman, it would pretty much be the death of France as i want it to exist

It would only be the death of sovereign empire. Capital is very much an empire in its own right, but of a much different and ultimately more powerful kind.

In many ways the EU represents the best attempt, so far, at bringing about the "Death of Empire" and it is interesting to note that the two countries most struggling with this in the past two decades, Hungary and the UK, are either (Hungary) shouting a lot but never really putting their money where their mouth is, or (UK) putting their money where their mouth was and finding out within the last few years what a stupidity that was while now facing a situation they'd prefer to undo but that can't be undone (internally or externally) as easily as it was to leave the EU. The UK experiencing that a modern-day Ireland backed by its EU siblings is in many ways more influential, and more ... 'sovereign', than a post-imperial UK on its own was very educational.

@@frankwitte1022 Leaving the sinking ship that is the EU was certainly the right choice. The problem is, the political and financial elite who control the UK do not agree, and made sure to sabotage the exit process. This can be seen from the flailing ineffectiveness of every administration, post-Cameron, in actually implementing Brexit. Leaving was not a mistake, entrusting the process to those who have all the incentive to stay was.

@@zerologic7912 I think it's best to not confuse and confound matters by mixing them, it only makes finding solutions harder in the end. What I mean in this is, is that the argument that the EU seems like one of current best efforts against one of the elements of empire. That other elements exist should not stand against this, if one can't take step forwards then how would one ever reach the goal after all? Beyond that it's probably important to always keep in mind what capital really is and is really about. It's not about empire in the end after all, instead it is about the gathering of resources so one can do larger projects with it, be these factories, canals, railways, social services, etc. All of these require more 'capital' in the most abstract real meaning of the word then any single person can gather. But in the end this just means you need to be able to gather resources for larger projects as well, it says nothing about how such should be gathered, used or controlled. There's no rule a single individual must control it after all, many alternate forms exist like quite large non-profit organizations that say run a theme park quite successfully. I suspect it is examples like these that might help in your apparent goals to escape what happens when enormous amounts of capital are controlled by but a single person. Though I'll admit I'm guessing at your goals and all there, so I can but hope it is of some help for you.

Chill, she doesn’t know, and most probably don’t care

Ataturk was one of the great men of the 20th century. A pity so few pay more attention to his achievements.

@@feastguy101 It's probably because Turkey before Ataturk and now after Ataturk is just another middle eastern (culturally) authoritarian theocracy, so the genius that was Ataturk often gets forgotten sandwiched between those periods.

@@viysnjor4811 Middle Eastern Theocracy... Erdoğan uses religion for politics. But Turkey is still a secular country. And trust me when I say this, the removal of secularism from the constitution would create a popular uprising. Same with the Kemalist ideology, Atatürk is pretty much still respected in Turkey (Even in the majority of Erdoğan supporters for some reason). What Turkey is experiencing is the possible future for Poland and Hungary. And they are not middle eastern last time I checked. Erdoğan's advantage is that he started earlier to corrupt the supreme court and military and has a much tighter grip to those than PiS or Orban currently has. You can say that we don't have an European culture. Sure. But we are not Arabs as well. The inclusion of Turkey to the Middle Eastern countries does not have any valid reason.

Ah man the ataturk/turkey videos on this channel are so good. Literally "what if all the american founding fathers were fused into ONE PERSON" and BAM you have Ataturk

@@Devillunar I understand the difference between Turks and Arabs, but Middle Eastern does not default to "Arab" either, anymore than saying a country has a "European" culture means they are Germanic. The issue is that modern Turkey has nothing in common with European nations, and instead far more in common with Middle Eastern ones (or Belorus/Russia) since Erdogan is an increasingly religious presidente-for-life type of figure.

And this is why the EU is doomed to failure. There is no unifying "European Identity". The only undeniably true definition of Europe is a geographic one.

And was the answer good?

A good answer to that question: "It's a continent". I hope this saves you another semester.

​@@FSPlata23 In geography classes that affirmation would spark more discussion.

Pero si es el mismísimo Dio

MI DIOS DIO Me encantó tu serie del mod de The New Order, hay posibilidad de volver? 🥺

krauts a bloody smart cookie i swear

You know... I wonder about this. Slovak language was pretty much unified due to Štúr in the 19th century when he Used the central Slovak dialect as the bench mark. However even to this day you can see a gradient from west of Cz to its east... And then from west of SK to its east. Where the regions between the two seem to overlap a little. Thus my idea here is this... If Slovak were not have been reformed by Štúr and the 3 Slovak dialects had remained intact... Would this gradient from Czech Republic to Slovakia be more obvious? After all Moravian Czech is easier and more akin to Slovak than bohemian one, and the region of Moravia called Slovacko is even more similar... Almost like a true blend sometimes. So.. in Theory... If this reform didn't happen and if Slovak dialects weren't diminished the Hungarian influence (which was part of the alarm for Štúr) .... Would czechoslovakia and the idea of Czechoslovak national unity be stronger and more possible? After all a level unity or at least strong Kinship/brotherhood was always there since Great Moravia really.

I have no idea about slovak/czech relations so I will not spew nonsense, but I do know enough that his comparison with serbia/montenegro is so off, it cannot even be taken seriously. there are so many issues with this video and obvious as well as not so obvious reasons how everything happened the way it happened, a lot of things simplified, biased/ignorant perspective, people really should put their noses in some history books instead of watching frauds like Kraut. there are many like him, I guess it's an overall internet phenomenon.. no wonder people don't know sh1t about history and claim a lot of things that could not be further from the truth. cheers

Czech an Slovak sound very distinct to me as a Pole. I understand Slovaks fairly well, and Czech not so much. So for me it feels like those are clearly separate languages. As for your pint 2. Piłsudski wished Czechoslovakia as a part of his pan-Slavic federation so those seems to be convergent views between him and Kollár

přesně tak

Polish pvp is just hilarious

I think that for a long time now, generally all slavic people have been the pvp zone for european/world wide conflitcs, the “europeans” have never likad us, we were always lower people, exploitable and living on land that was good for food, had its good resources and most importantly we have always been a border to Asia. Guarding Europe from Ottomans, Mongols and other invaders, and also preventing other europeans going to Asia. Also a unified tight connection between all slavic tribes was a big threat to them, as we are great in numbers and surface area, even before Russia expanded so far east. Sadly i don’t think we will ever get our peace

Thats the dream brother

With Poland though I'm more worried about it taking over Russia's role as the imperial power of the region and starts to compete with Russia to dominate Ukraine. Democracy in Poland is starting to break down and the EU is not doing very well to correct it. I think Poland represents the modern EU better than any other member so integrating them is critical.

You - Ukrainians - have made it absolutely clear where you want to belong. No other nations paid with many lives for the wish to join the EU. It's shame on us that we didn't notice this, and act fast enough.

Why?

From Portugal, I can tell you that I’ve always seen Georgians to be Europeans as a matter of course. Our maps show the Caucasus countries as being in Europe, and what I’ve seen of Georgia points to it being an European nation in all aspects. Can’t say the same of Russia. My opinion of Russia was never very positive, but it completely nosedived after their invasion of Georgia. Further history as only confirmed that negative view. My best wishes for Georgia, and my hope that you will eventually be able to liberate the unredeemed portions of your territory that were cut of you at gunpoint by the machinations of an evil imperial power.

It seems pretty obvious to me that Georgia should be considered European. But I guess when one is out near the edges of what is politically considered the European continent one might at times feel a bit less certain if everyone further towards the center actually agrees. Best of luck to Georgia though, it's certainly not in the easiest of positions right now, hopefully it can handle it all with out to much trouble.

@@feastguy101 I agree that Georgians are Europeans and while I'm not a fan of Russian aggression, that does not make their people non-European. Also let's not pretend that Georgia was some pure innocent victim, Abkhazians have a right to self-determination, their people have gone through enough suffering by Russian and Turkish empires, they don't need Georgian colonisation. Though I will say I am mixed on South Ossetia, Not trying to start a fight, just saying that too many rush to hate Russia blindly and anyone associated with them, but it's far more common that Russia uses people in difficult situation. Look at Armenians, Russia has them trapped, with Turkey and Azerbaijan constantly lobbying the EU and US if Armenia leaves the Russian sphere they will be isolated and possibly annihilated by an increasingly aggressive Aliyev regime. So yes Russia is an imperial power that cut that land away from Georgia, but blindly giving it back to Georgia in a heartbeat would not make the conflict that Abkhazians and Ossetians have with the central Georgian government go away, and Tbilisi to this day has shown no interest in any dialogue or appeasement. Important to remember that Stalin, who was a Georgian, ended the Abkhazian Soviet Socialist Republic and forced it to be a part of Georgia as an "autonomous" republic.

​@@feastguy101 "Caucasus countries" were either part of Iran, Turkey or Russia for more than a thousand years. To say they are a part of Europe is to tacitly claim Iran and Turkey are European countries, which is a laughable claim.

Turkish view and practice of religion was always different from the other Middle Eastern nations. That helped Atatürk to accomplish his ambitions.

@@RandomGuy-df1oy Ottoman Empire itself was not the most heavy handed with religion because it was a multiethnic empire with several religious groups and practitioners. Modern day Turkey being the centre of power under the Ottomas, and the direct offspring of the empire, it also inherited this relatively liberal temperament.

Completely agree with you. I also really liked that @Kraut explained the historical development of the EU, I was very important (and necessary) for a silly American like myself.

@@monkeyseatcatfood He negates to mention the fact that unfettered immigration has led to brexit also, due to massive increases in terrorism, grape and murder on our streets not to mention the pushing of Islamic culture across our nation.

its a goverment for goverments

Basically a gang. theres big China over here, and big USA over there. and some big powerful corporations creeping around. and russia is drunk again. im small, youre small, we're all small, so lets form up into one big force. so nobody can fck with us. and thats the eu. then suddenly .... ' yes but i deserve two slices of cake 🍰 because im Britain and im better than everyone and if you don't give me my two slices ill leave, theres probably more, and better cake outside anyway' - CLUNK. Adios. and that was brexit.

It's okay, our education system sucks. We should've taught this in HS

He’s correct.

Indeed and I think what we need to do above all is avoid nihilism. Europe is not perfect and has many, many problems to work out that won't be easy to resolve. However we need to keep our trust in the EU and that if we all work hard we can resolve these conflicts. That for every problem there is a solution and if there isn't we can find a way to work around it or deal with it. The biggest threat to Europe is actually internal far right policies that threaten to tear the culture of cooperation apart. We shouldn't have delusions that it will be an easy thing or that no sacrifices will be needed. However we should keep the faith that we are all strong enough and wise enough to make it happen. Far right politics feed off of nihilism and that the only way to improve ourselves is to tear others down.

So why didn't he back up his words by doing just that?

@@MaticTheProto But never meant what he said.

@@MrMarinus18 You trust the undemocratic eu? especially after the last few weeks?

As an American dealing with a nationalist right wing refusing to acknowledge that America has become a backwards place. And in order to remedy that backwardness we must embrace European social democracy.

> be Chinese > open an English video > write a comment in Chinese > refuse to provide translation > leave

@@davidperin9938 almost every nationalist/right wing american i know thinks america is declining.

@@rizkyadiyanto7922 here is the problem they refuse to acknowledge why it is declining. I.e allowing a massive rich poor divide that concentrates the vast majority of the wealth in the top 10 percent. Leading to an erosion of the power of the people to influence politics.

@@khai96x >Be Chinese > Open an English video >Write a comment in Chinese even though I speak English because otherwise why would I watch an English video >Provide no translation >Leave

Like taking sponsorship from KFC in a video about veganism.

From my own experience (French public education), we are mainly taught about the post WW1 trauma and the rise of totalitarian nations, not much else. In general Eastern Europe history is barely touched upon. I'm assuming nationalists took their vision of a golden age of sovereign state from their own bottom, altough I'm far from knowlegable on their rethoric.

Yup at least in western Europe as far as I know, we tend to overlook anything that happened east of Germany tbh

It would be hard to generalise about "European education" because every European country has a completely separate education system. For me personally as a Brit, it wasn't discussed much if at all even though I studied history, but that's only because my history course didn't cover that period. Also your channel is incredibly good, easily one of the best history channels on the website especially given how little attention the topics you cover get elsewhere.

In the Netherlands, we tend to focus on our own history and those of our close neighbours. It's mostly about being scared shitless about what was happening during WWI and to mostly zoom in on all the factors that led to the NSDAP claiming power post-WWI and then WWII, the occupation and a few other events. We were taught nothing about the Interwar Period in Eastern Europe.

В России мы это проходим просто потому что это настолько нас касалось что это невозможно упускать. Жаль только что все больше и больше в наших учебниках оправдывают белогвардейцев.

have you even watched yet lol

@@benmcgrath3175 its from 9 days ago bro

idk how it happened but yeah ig this video is 9 days old??

@@willb_177 It's called early access :)

It's going to evolve into a mixed-race united states of Europe. Just like the founder Kalergi intended.

Are you french ?

Because France is not à empire

Propaganda

Nothing says colonialism like sending an expeditionnary force to Mali to save the country from falling apart and being overtaken by jihadis, loosing dozens of good frenchmen in the process, investing millions to rebuild the Malian army, permanently setting up bases in the desert to make sure that they'll never come back, only to be booted out of the country a few years later because the local junta decided they were going to use the evil white soldier as a scapegoat for anything going sour, and just leaving without sending any kind of bill whatsoever. Meanwhile our soldiers were fighting for their country, their youth obviously kept running away from it and illegaly immigrating en masse to France. And they just never thanked us for anything whatsoever. Damn, I guess we really are a shit empire.

IF FRANCO GERMAN RELATIONS FAILS THEY CANNOT BAILOUT EU. STOP WOKEISM BS

I agree totally on the France issue, I think it’s a red herring when many other EU states are drags on greater integration. But I have to differ on the UK which is still an Empire. Ask an English person and they won’t see one but go to Wales and especially Scotland and Northern Ireland and you’ll probably find a large minority/majority who consider themselves attached to an empire against their democratic will. To have separatism in such close proximity to the seat of power is quite destabilizing and the English will have to find a way to peacefully deal with this before their empire disintegrates entirely. The EU was a good sticking plaster on that separatism but now it’s gone the pull will only get greater. This is simply not an issue in France where separatism is a very minor issue in most of mainland France and one defeated by economic necessity in its colonies and Corsica.

His numbers about Uranium furnishers for France are completely false. Canada accounts for only a small fraction of france's uranium, Niger is at 17 %, and Khazakstan is the n1 furnisher, a bit a ahead of Niger and Uzbekistan.

Je sais pas si t'es Français but you're absolutely right, I was thinking of making a comment but then I saw yours so thanks

You hit on something that I cut out of the video to finish it faster. It is in fact a valid political concern in modern Europe. Spanish, German, Dutch, and Belgian troops, assisted France in its military mission in Mali. An assistance that was granted due to French influence over both Africa and political influence in the E.U. And it raises an issue that should be discussed: Should European troops fight the wars of a singular European state? In particular, if these wars are not even defensive?

Could you explain how 40% of eu citizens could out vote 60%, from my understanding that could only happen under the electoral system like first past the post which i think the uk is the only one in europe to use.

That is not a thing that could happen given the European parliament elects its members proportionally

@@Kraut_the_Parrot well, it was also because intervention in Mali had overwhelming public and political support in both Europe and across West Africa. The immediate success of the intervention was undermined by Mali overthrowing her own government (with the benefit of hindsight it's clear that Wagner were involved earlier than previously thought), but the fact remains that all of France's African allies, including the Malian government, and European participants in the intervention, had popular support across the board.

@@Victorvondoom9159 It doesnt quite elect proportionally. Smaller countries generally have more representatives pr. voter as a way to keep the EUP from becoming dominated by the countries with the largest populations in Europe. I assume this is what is being refered to.

Certainly isn't perfect, but it seems like a good idea and ideal to try and work on for now. Can't say I see much hope in the alternatives at least, none of those I've heard of seem to have nearly as much prospects to keep things peaceful and prosperous. If world peace could be achieved eventually via a method like this in time as well, one can but try at least I think.

As an Austrian, I agree. And I hate what my government did to you guys this year. Not fair.

@@schtreg9140 Yes I agree thow we need to reform the eu in to a directly democratic leftist power house.

@@schtreg9140 No hard feelings, it's just politics, and you don't need to apologize. We retaliated and OMV profits were smashed by a tax introduced last week(Some billions) and Austrian banks are losing big. Austria did not win anything by doing this and lost a lot and it will continue to lose.. I mean, we have the biggest untapped oil and gas resources in the area, and until December you guys were the main partners in this win-win situation, and when I say win-win I am also speaking about bilateral high-level corruption.

@@schtreg9140 this year. But hopefully it wont be the case the next year.

No I think it’s much more to do with geography. Like kraut pointed out in the Danube video there ought to be an EU cooperative block aiming to promote Atlantic trade with Portugal, Ireland, Iceland and the UK as they are separated from the Rhine, Danube, Baltic and Mediterranean regions.

Portugal is a periferic country in the European settings so we tend to look to the oceans and trade there. Sure it's easy with the Portuguese speaking countries but we tend to keep past trade partners (India, Indonesia, Japan, etc) to promote peace and trade. Lusotropicalismo was a last effort to make the Portuguese empire survive past the ww2 and cold war

@@Maia_Cyclist As a whole, I agree. Its moreso I worry about some general attitudes alot of people have in our country

@@avet4952 it's discontent with the politics and a lack of connection between the general public and political parties. Check partys like Volt Portugal IL or Livre more modern than the tradicional and not so extreme

no, these unions between Hispanic-Americans and Portuguese-Americans always end up with Brazil having to have the external responsibility of a Germany without German resources, in the end this MercoSul only means that we have to support the socialist dictatorship of South America and throw the our people in the hole, we should put all these projects, especially peso-real far away from here

I hope not. As a Brazilian

@@joao.fenix1473 why not?

​​@@sabianaum7263 because policies between South American countries are quite erratic and tend to change a lot between governments That is why the Central American countries and Mexico end up revolving in the orbit of influence of the US or China, because South America is too unstable

@@armandoventura9043it is not like Europa was that much stable at that time. This kind of political projects require decades, maybe generations, it is a long process but not at all impossible. You must start from somewhere, Latin America has to stop to be the puppet of some imperialistic narcissistic nation.

That's because you're not Chinese. It's like an American viewing European history from an American perspective or an Inuit viewing Chinese history from their perspective.

The Warring States/Spring and Autumn periods are a massive element of the Chinese cultural myth. The narrative goes that the major Chinese project of the first millennium B.C. was in finding a common bedrock. The Han identity and the Confucian societal model are seen as the legacy of that effort, and they're the reason China is such an anti-fragile entity today: China cares first and foremost about its own unity and security. You can see the same attitude in their modern "assimilation projects" in Tibet and Xinjiang, with those regions being deemed of paramount geopolitical importance to Han security. That's why they're willing to risk the bad PR that comes with cultural genocide these days.

We all can learn a lot if we are willing to listen to each other.

@@Lobsterwithinternetexcept i as an italian and most of my friends in the classic classes think it this way

@@Boretheory Yeah most people, especially people politically apathetic or not all that interested in history, don't tend to think this way, but plenty of people DO think this way about the Roman Empire, and Europeans themselves have thought about Europe this way probably from the fall of Rome. Charlemagne had a whole restoration of Rome in the West going on precisely because there was a desire for that. The Roman Church has attempted to keep the fragmented Europe under it united as much as it could too. The Renaissance really brought back nostalgia for antiquity as well. The more anti-imperial peace and unity idea is comparatively much newer, maybe only 500 or 600 years, only really taking off in the last 300, compared to the imperial peace which has existed since Rome and was still present as a motivation in the Napoleonic Wars.

But its muhh unbiased muhh progressive don't you see?

@@balintlakatos7533 I am actually a progressive but i am also a pragmatist . Kraut is the epitome of German centrism. His loves the eu but refuses to criticize the current system . Germany has no backbone and its legit vassal state . Also his attacks on nationalism are dumb many nationalists fought for the freedom of their nations without being racist . Bismarck for example opposed any wars after the unification of Germany and worked very hard to avoid wars he also calls Bismarck a dictator despite the fact that Imperial Germany Had elections

Very thought-provoking comment, especially that last sentence. A rare perspective I've never heard before, and it might very well be true. Unity can certainly encourage stagnation and it might explain why the Romans rarely innovated after taking control of the Mediterranean.

But in a more and more Globalised World there are new Rivals to be found

@@Royal-sp9pb To me though I think we have to ask ourselves is stagnation really a bad thing. You cannot have infinite growth. You either gain more territory or can't keep up. But, the Earth is limited unless we go to space. But then we have the solar system. But what if we can't get past that? There will always be a roadblock to infinite growth. Is conflict really the solution? Like a phoenix die and rebirth? The peoples thousands of years ago no longer exist. There is no Sumerian, Hittite, or roman peoples left. There are a few Assyrians which is a miracle in of itself. The last old Europeans before Indo-Europeans are still alive in Basque. But, people die out and new people create new things. But, is that really good? Right now, in our globalized world we're seeing fewer individual cultures being relevant. more people try to emulate the west and learn English forgoing their native language. I don't know if thats a good thing. But, I think its something we need to discuss. Do we let conflict happen to let new ideas flourish and new people to emerge? Or do we embrace peace, globalization, stability, and stagnation and try to live with that.

What made you go from remainer to pro brexit? I was and still am a remainer (for economic reasons mainly) but the past being the past, being leave or remain is irrelevant. I'm unsure if I would be a "rejoiner" though. I would like to hear your opinions on the EU and why it's not it.

@@isaaclancaster3693 Do you mean in hindsight or immediately after the vote?

@@lordgemini2376 I voted remain as a teenager in college. I believed in multiculturalism, progress and pan national identity. I also love history. David Cameron lead the Remain Campaign on the idea that we could change the EU from within and block it's most radical tendencies, at the time that was the European Army. On the other hand I held sympathies with the Brexit Campaign and some of it's aims. I am a patriot, mainly of our history. I was never convinced of the net economic gain of leaving the EU, I knew it would harm the economy on a Net level. I did want closer ties with the Commonwealth and America, and honestly so did the EU like with Canada and Australia. The main thing that made me flip was democracy. I was determined to accept and support whichever vote won. Brexit won so now I look to the benefits of Brexit.

@@Litany_of_Fury Wise decision and elaboration

@@Litany_of_Fury A yes because democracy is actually hivemindism. You don't have to change you opinions because a majority disagrees with you. You just have to accept that most other ppl disagree with you. Most of the time that doesn't even matter if it is something which can be decided between individuals. But in the case of brexit that is a bit hard.

so the EU is to you, what Norway is to me im danish

the East isnt that expensive tbh

@@4ren64 The flight ticket prices are already enough to put me in debt

@@crazydinosaur8945 Hvo intet vover, intet vinder!

@@noahthenorthern174 og intet taber

yea so how did germans or how do mexicans feel in ur notanempire

Especially when you consider Alaska and Hawaii + every other territory, including D.C.

Additionally, the United States's international relations position works as a formwork of cooperation for North America. In true Monroe Fashion, this network of cooperation extends towards the Pacific with Guam, A. Samoa, Japan, S. Korea, Taiwan -- plus the 'Indo-Pacific Economic Framework'.

​@@benismann ńáźì alert

@@benismann ignored. The Mexicans have been ignored, and for the foreseeable future, that's how they'll stay

Post-colonial and post-imperial as well. Also: Слава Україні!

Calling the EU post-colonial is laughable. The members abuse their membership to pressure trading partners, especially in Africa, into unfavorable deals. The EU is not post-colonial, it is neo-colonial.

Where he say that

I think you could also make the case for the Songhai empire to have that role.

The fall of Rome was good for Europe tho

Why though ?

@@eliasstenman3710 I see your point but in my mind Songhai is to Mali as Byzantium is to Rome. Some may disagree but I still view mail as being at the core and height of the Sehalian and west African imperial system.

I do too. This is the Realist worldview. Keep in mind that this is Kraut presenting his Liberal worldview (Liberal in the context of international affairs, not Liberal as in the free market or LGBT rights). I still recognise that it is a good alternative way of seeing things, but the Liberal theory is a bit flimsy atm.

Keep in mind that this is his way of seeing it, his point of view, but that's not necessarily what "the EU is about" according to everyone. I'm European (from Italy) and I view the EU as a way for Europe to gain collective political influence to stand its ground against giant countries like India, China and the US, and I hope for this reason that Europe will follow the path of integration and unity in the future, and so do many other European people too. To just dismiss the EU as "nations cooperating" seems unfair to me because it ignores European institutions such as the European Parliament, directly elected by European people, and the ideas of a lot of people who genuinely feel European and hope that European countries can recognise that they are much more similar than they are different. The UN is "nations cooperating", the EU is an "ever closer union", a political entity that calls its citizens "europeans".

@@talete7712 The EU will not become a collective political influence until Europeans respect each other's geopolitical needs -and thus far that has proven to be impossible.

@@stephenjenkins7971 are you from an EU country? By your name I think you aren't. If you aren't then you have no say in this. Why do you even care so much?

@@talete7712 I was giving an opinion on the state of the EU. Am I wrong? Seeing as you're trying to deflect to where I live, I'd say you know I'm correct.

Being friends with people you disagree with is fun. No need to filter your opinions, no fear of echo chambers, monotony-breaking conflicts on demand...

@@MrSamulai I couldn't agree more

In his "co-operation as an international order" chapter he talks about how the European project is about post-imperial peaceful co-operation. I don't see why we can't create a similar post-imperial structure of co-operation with CANZUK. Sure, it's not as economically large and impressive as the EU, but does it really have to be?

Private companies continue to make a killing off the former colonies. I think of it as the government fronting the bill so that private companies bring the money home. The UK, the Netherlands, and especially France just realized you don’t need the colony anymore.

As an American who was always too busy to figure out what Brexit was about, may you please tell me what it is that Brexiteers were aiming for in leaving the EU? I may have vague ideas, but nothing concrete

@@Zeromus725 I'm happy to give a brief run-down for science. Disclaimer - this is what was going through my mind in 2016, but I'm not aiming to start a flame war here, so I'm not going to defend them if people want to tear them apart in the replies: The biggest part was immigration. A lot of people say that Brexiteers just hate foreigners, but looking at the bigger picture, the Brexit vote was in 2016, in the middle of the European Refugee Crisis from Syria. The EU's response basically amounted to "Southern Europe is swamped? Germany, France, UK, Sweden, you guys pick up the slack. Wait, terrorist groups are openly gloating that they're sneaking terrorists into Europe among the refugees? How about we just ignore them?" which lead to a spike in terrorism across the continent for years to come. Even with buying Russian petrol and gas, 6 years later, the EU always seem to make themselves look complacent and spineless and slow to act on anything until it's too late. Another part was fishing. The population of cod in the English Channel has been suffering from overfishing for decades, and a large portion of the fishermen were from Spain, and not even the UK. Under EU law, this matter is out of the hands of the UK government, and the EU never enforced the kind of environmental protections for British waters that they have for the Mediterranean Sea. It's a good example of what brexiteers mean when talking about "taking back control" whether they're right or wrong. I also need to bring up the misinformation campaign. Boris Johnson infamously advertised on the side of a bus that the UK gave £350 billion a year to the EU, and should instead give it to the NHS. Also, British people were getting targeted with Facebook adverts telling them to vote Brexit which could be traced back to Russia or Cambridge Analytica. It's not a valid reason to vote Brexit, but sadly I'd be lying if I said misinformation wasn't involved. A big part was also CANZUK and the Commonwealth. The UK founded an enormous association of countries that made up a third of the world population, just to ignore them and only form trade agreements with them as part of the EU instead. A commonly brought up replacement for the EU is often the CPTPP which is a faster-growing economy than the EU. Back in 2014, David Cameron promised "one last go" to make big changes to the EU to give the UK powers to limit the free movement agreement, to help stop terrorists and help keep immigration at manageable levels. It went about as well as you'd expect. Similarly, France are currently attempting to create something (I've heard people describe it as the EU 2.0) to make it easier for European nations to co-operate and trade without necessarily having to be in the EU and follow its laws. It's a cool idea, but it's ultimately unlikely to go anywhere. Also, the UK is attempting a "Swiss-style" relationship with the EU, which from minute 1, everyone was sceptical of because the EU hates its current relationship with Switzerland and desperately wants to leverage Switzerland to join. I'm still sceptical of the common argument that "The EU is a great idea, it just needs reform" because the EU seems inflexible and hell-bent on fighting any reform, including those that it desperately needs. Edit: something else I forgot to bring up is that the EU wants to merge into a super-state. I've seen people argue that it's not, but not convincingly. One of the EU's core principles is "ever-deepening" co-operation and integration. Enforcing that will inevitably lead to a United States of Europe in the long term. This isn't really an unpopular option for countries like Sweden, Poland, or Ireland, but obviously it's a harder pill to swallow for the UK, which is a former superpower and has a history and still has current allies, interests, and British Overseas Territories to protect on the other side of the world. Would a centralised EU military really bother deploying to, say, the South Atlantic Ocean if the Falklands needed protecting? There is a case to be made for a federal United States of Europe, but it is not popular in the UK, and it's the clear direction the EU are currently taking. Also blue passports FTW lol Apologies for the essay, but this is an oversimplification if anything. We had about a year of this back-and-forth in the UK, and then another 6 and a half years afterwards.

@@belnonaodh1520 I see, there's a lot of stuff in here I'd never heard before, like with the fishing thing. It seems reasonable to me that people would want to protect the aquatic ecosystems and relevant commerce. The other points are interesting too even if more evidently debatable. Immigration I do remember being a huge topic. For the potential replacement economic alliances, did that end up fading away to time? Hindered by the pandemic? Work in progress? And about the Boris bus thing, is it infamous because it was false, misleading, or some other reason? I also appreciate that you're not afraid to talk about the misinformation. Thanks for the post!

It's not easy being Russia's neighbour.

He was a Lithuanian in a very old sense strongly attached to the legacy of the grand Duchy but having nothing in common with lithuanian nation-state.

To be frank, as a polish student of history, I can tell you quite confidently that (at least in the academic circles of my university) the glorification and the Cult of Marshal Piłsudski, which was so prevalent over the years, is now being steadily torn down. He's facing much more scrutiny for both his foreign and especially internal policies. I can't with certainty capture the opinion of the general public, but I feel that it is also shifting towards a more critical view of his actions. Most people agree that he was instrumental, or at the very least incredibly important for Poland during its early years of independence, but his actions later on leave a lot to be desired. And, while his idea of Prometheanism was something that definitely had some potential, at least on paper, it would have been very difficult or even impossible to implement during the turbulent political situation at the time. Also he had always put Polish interests first on the diplomatic stage, so it's not that far of a stretch that his Prometheanism Project would have Poland take the center stage in this new "Cooperative Collective". Okay, that's enough of an essay, bye.

Yeah, lots of people who have some good ideas... but also many a flaw. We can but hope I guess to try and find the good ideas thought of over time and try to assemble them in to yet better new ideas. Hopefully we'll have some success at that.

@@qqtrol1774 He was more of the Vilnius citizen, so considered himself such. Also recently learned, that he actually spoke Lithuanian alongside Polish as his first language.

Hello. There might be a hiatus between the nature of the Brexit debate, whiwch is the way the Brexiteers presented it to the population, and their own ideas and objectives. In essence (and that's also illustrated) by your post, it shifted attention on everything but oneselves. When you do that, all of the above in your post seems pointless.

@@nico210 Your post is incoherent What does that even mean “shifting attention from oneself” (I assume you mean brexiteer which isn’t true). This is a debate not about brexiteers but about the EU. The EU’s actions and inactions were central to the leave vote regardless about your feeling on the matter. With the referendum being that close I really think a more responsive EU actually willing to do take certain demands seriously would have made the difference

@@maxkennedy8075 My post was a response to your post and your post was about the Brexit(eers), not about the EU. You think your post was about the EU, my answer is that it's only about the delusions and myths about the EU and Britain propagated during the referedum debate. Basically imaginary Britain vs a imaginary EU, and a way not to look properly in the mirror. Which part is not coherent?

My point exactly. I am a Greek and I completely agree with you. The EU must never unify

It is a sad truth, that wars breed the fastest innovation, as people make up technologies to kill each other better as well as to protect themselves against one another. Truly a sad thing to observe about humans wherever you look. I personally do not see any point in being proud of some random (I had no influence on where and when I was born) factoid of any culture. I would not be a proud "X", based on "X" size, history, conquers, etc. Actually, I want to humbly acknowledge my place in the world, which I share with so many other humans. Maybe I am influenced by being Slovak. We, Slovaks, never colonized, never dominated other nations, never initiated wars (we were just dragged along by external forces into them). We just wanted to live peacefully on the land we were born in, use our native language for communication also in churches and official documents, making up our own rules. Slovakia has no big "global" history, heck, most people in the world could not even find Slovakia on a map. And we have only a handful big personalities that are somewhat internationally known. But that is OK. It is still better than build an illusion of greatness around some "big superpower" myth, as it can and often does lead the simpler minded people of "big superpower" into arrogance against other "small" countries/nations. Having a "big superpower" history is a double-edged sword and it can harm small nations as well as the big ones, if they fall for their own lies and stories.

It will if certain vast immediate neighbour with lots of military potential stops being vast or having military potential 😉 And if you are into conspiracy theories that _might_ be a reason why US hesitates to provide Ukraine with means to deliver a knockout blow.

@090giver090 if that's the case (and as an American, I assure you that it isn't), why don't one of the European powers provide those weapons?

@@Sometimes_Happiness As I said it's just and exercise in conspiracy thinking I found funny. But I still believe that European dependency on US for security would diminish a lot when there would be no potential danger from the east.

We did have some official reconciliation with Serbia and compared to 20 years ago Hungarian relations with Slovakia and Romania are steadily improving. Governmental cooperation has been very well and the younger generations are less concerned about past grievances. (Schengen and the Internet probably helped a lot here). Most far right troublemakers are relatively fringe with a small size loud bark and are usually funded by Russia. The only country Hungary has a real problem with is Ukraine, because the Ukrainian officials can't help themselves but behave like dicks. It doesn't help that from a Hungarian point of view Ukrainians and Russians are seen as the same, both are just slightly different sounding Soviets.

Hungary is a very peculiar country as it was either under other Empire or was imperializing other countries.

As I like to say to all Romanian and Hungarian nationalists, there are more people living in 2 Asian cities than there are Hungarians and Romanians on the planet. The feud is pathetic, we were besties until 1848.

@@DerDop I agree. our division only makes it easier for the west and Russians to control us. If we work together we actually have a chance to build something decent.

There were and are. The tripoint (hármashatár) at Rajka is a very good example of this. It is a point where the borders of Austria, Slovakia and Hungary meet. There are no walls, barbed wire or checkpoints. There is only a triangular table where the borders intercept. The problem is 1) the continued presence of large Hungarian ("hostage") minorities in the successor states and 2) it is politically expedient for these countries to cynically exploit the animosity. In Hungary, the remembrance of past grievances is kept continuously alive by the both nationalist provocation from neighbouring nationalist movements, and the constant stories of mistreatment of Hungarian minorities. This can be exploited for political gain, because it creates a "Hungary vs the world" kind of separatist mentality. This mentality then _demands_ rituals celebrating the historical Greater Hungary and the condemnation of the current status quo. Then, on the other side, Hungarians remembering Trianon is exploited by the neighbours as they overreact to the smallest of gestures (last thing was Orban wearing a scarf with the picture of Greater Hungary) because by presenting an external enemy and especially an internal threat (the Hungarian minorities), cynical politicians can energise their electorate. The way out would be: Joint effort by all parties to emphasise the meaninglessness of borders in Europe (sadly can't happen with Orban fighting his war of independence against Brussels...) Joint effort by all parties to downplay the real historic atrocities they suffered (not lying about them, just stop mentioning them all the time) Hungary must stop the victim narrative (prevailing narrative is that Hungary was the defender of Europe against the Turks, but was then betrayed and thrown to the wolves by the West after WW1) The neighbours must stop overreacting to minor gestures and must stop pretending Hungary has any capacity to threaten their territorial integrity (especially when it's now the poorest nation in the EU after Bulgaria and has its hands busy by trying not to collapse)

It's a pretty substantial chunk of Europe though.

Correct the EU is a Jw creation.

@@LarsPallesen It's like saying Canada is in America. Say that to a Canadian.

You're right it is a tragic moment of history, and Intermarium SHOULD have happened, however Poland's territorial ambitions for Lithuanian, Ukrainian and Czech territories somewhat detract from that sympathy towards their second republic.

@@alexcap755 Yeah, I don't know what they were thinking.

How interesting that great peace-loving poles in 1920s somehow ended up themselves becoming oppressors and conquerors after taking Czech land and west Ukraine and Belarus. Oh wait, they always were like this, they just got unlucky and lost to other empires.

@@sirgromith They were trying to recreate the borders of PLC. It didn't help that many people in power in Poland were of mixed ethnicity (Piłsudski was Polish/Lithuanian) and didn't want a Poland that's just for the Poles.

It seems that the ideology of one man can't change a nation and his nation has became the very thing he tried to destroy.

And that's all it should be. Economic > Political.

@@lordgemini2376 Unfortunately Belgium and Germany (and sometimes France) use their disproportionate influence on the EU to bully the smaller member states, namely in Eastern and Southern Europe, and I feel are turning the EU into just another empire, especially as we see with them prohibiting people from utilizing their own national resources (one of the reasons for Brexit, British fishers were not allowed to fish in British waters) and with their calls to create an EU army. Perhaps Kraut's bias blinds him to this, but as an outsider (American) this whole situation seems very suspicious to me, and if I were living in Europe I would be very worried at the direction Brussels is steering the EU.

@@lordgemini2376 No, it is in fact the political aspect that has guaranteed continued peace.

@@bfedezl2018 I disagree. Brussels did better preserving peace in Europe when it was simply a common market and didn't (overtly) interfere into the affair of state. The pretense of being a apolitical system was a pretense it was a useful useful at developing codependents and reconciliation without becoming a direct threat to the traditional nation state. It's making the mistakes the Catholic church did in the 11th century.

Exactly the only danger in Europe is Germany not France, it's Germany who wish to dominates the EU not France again, and it's also Germany fault if there is a war in Ukraine as they financed Russian military for decades and still does with billions upon billions of € every day for gas

The coin has always two sides. Taking advantage of Schengen for cheap labour could also be seen as direct investments and providing employment. Costumless exports can go in both directions and a lot of german companies have problems with the competition from our eastern neighbors. Six months ago Germany was blamed for ruining Europe by not having enough energy to survive the winter, now it is for becoming an energetic powerhouse. It always depends on the perspective. But I really don't understand why everything the EU does, is interpreted as a german plot for dominance. Per capita Germany has the least representatives in the EU parliament, every nation gets only one seat in the European Commission (Polands commissioner is responsible for agriculture) and every nation has the veto right in the European Council. Yes, germans have a lot of economic weight and they can be really annoying smarta**es, but does this make them dominant? Anyway, the EU is meant to make sure that we sort our differences out with arguments, as a worst case in a courtroom in Luxemboug. If we manage to keep it this way, the EU is a success. Love from Berlin!

I agree that Germany does uses its influence to advance its selfish interests. But by no means that the EU is some kind of Zollverein that only benefits German imperial aspirations. You can always leave and see how the EU has been instrumental on Poland's rapid economic growth. One thing that people always tend to think wrong in economics is this: ever since the Industrial Revcolution, our world has always been positive-sum. Meaning, it's NOT zero-sum.

based

Love Canada from PL

It won't happen, but I lowkey want Canada to join the EU. And to stop its mining companies being such dicks to the latin American/African nations who should otherwise be its allies. Because that would be a way for Canada to buy into a post-imperial world, and create levarage for itself against the US. The irony of this is that Canada is an empire, which still denies sovereignty to the Indigenous peoples within its borders, and fails to uphold the treaties. However the EU contains similar ironies, both with respect to Romani people who barely exist in the European imagination, and to national minorities within national borders (France, Spain, and the UK while it was still a member are still empires even without overseas colonies).

Southern neighbor here, florida man to be exact, he has a friend who is going over Canadian history. I think in his mexico series he links to the channel making it

The issue with Canada is 9 times out of 10 it's the same story as The United States. But like 30% smugger.

@@caiwilliams2905 somewhat tangent to the subject matter, but what would sovereignty of indigenous peoples in Canada look like in practice ? And why do you think that hasn't happened yet? I'm a leaf too btw

He always does that when it comes to discussing Brexit or anything Britain related. He is a great youtuber but everyone has their flaws and anything UK related is a weak point for him and his discussions 😂

Agree. In his "co-operation as an international order" chapter he talks about how the European project is about post-imperial peaceful co-operation. I don't see why the UK can't create a similar post-imperial structure of co-operation with CANZUK. Sure, it wouldn't be as economically large and impressive as the EU, but does it really have to be? Still, compared to Adam Something who I sometimes feel gives the British an even harder time than the Russians, Kraut makes more of an effort to understand it.

@@belnonaodh1520 which to be honest brings up an interesting point on British identity within Europe

Hello Zeit Geist, everyone and every nation has its spin on the europe and the EU. But the fact, that poles, czech and germans can have discussion about Silesia without getting violent is an achievement in itself. The fact that all former sowjet occupied states accept their borders is something you dont see in other parts of the world.

Except for HU, but that’s a WW1 story😄 Gruesse

@@adamz7038 And some of our older generation as well. Accepting the "Oder-Neisse-Line" was a big step for many "displaced" . Hungarians, damn they havent raided us german for at least 800years. While defeating the french laid the foundation of the german empire, defeating the hungarians was the foundation of the holy roman empire. If you do Gruesse, go full German, Grüße^^ The "ß" makes the difference between german german and swiss german.

Yeah. The third point surprised me as well. I am a Czechoslovak child, so I spent my childhood in both countries and I have never encountered a serious claim about Slovaks being part of Czech nation. Language is different, also religious identity is much more important in Slovakia than it is in Czechia. Plus the folklore is different. Talking about nations in Central/Eastern Europe I would also like to remind people about Rusyns and their unfortunate fate, there is a high number of them in the eastern parts of Slovakia.

Il y a beaucoup de choses qui ne vont pas avec cette analyse qu'on pourrait qualifier de simpliste. L'intégration européenne de l'Ukraine ou la "dépendance" française à l'uranium ne peuvent pas être arrangées de cette façon pour créer un narratif, c'est au mieux naïf au pire malhonnête.

A jealous husband is like a turk 😂

The Habsburgs had many political, institutional, social and other issues. It was a failed state already for a long time and was mainly propped up by Germany in the final decades of it's existence.

Its such a horrible extractive empire that it _(in effect)_ pays a large part of the people just for being in it.

Bribery is a powerful tool

Respectfully fück Y0U, the EU Project is dependent on the German Economy, and thx to certain people that took like 90% of the Resources in the Rheinland and made Germany dependent on Russian trade since (at minimum) 1939 and later had half the Country live under there Rule for 40 years and forced us (yet again) to give up claims on land that belong to us because they feared German economy overtaking theres you othe keep a low profile when we try to foster good relations with Russia that would not do half the things they did if NATO and the USA stop annoying them, because remind me how did the current Ukrainian President get into office?

Happy New Year but if you call me a citizen of the European Union I will probably react worst that if you called Scottman British.

Lol then stop asking for US for military and financial assistance every time you guys into a fight with each other

man you need to upload more your video are good

It is pretty much main thing which many people have against the EU and some people want to rather start their own version of EU,but majority still rather hopes that there is still chance to change how does EU work.

@@tefky7964 How can a change be made when the only people that can start the change would be removed? People at that level of power don't surrender it willingly.

@@derekburge5294 Alright,what would you do?

@@tefky7964 Other than dissolving and trying again, I would recommend a letter writing campaign. Smother Ursula von der Leyen and your parliament members with paper letters demanding a vote of no confidence of the current commission, and promise that the letters will not stop until commissioners being legislation to dissolve the commission. Emails are ignorable, but if a politician has to hire staff just to deal with physical mail, that sometimes works.

Orban is just putin or erdogan (I feel somewhat bad for putting erdogan in this list). He is just there for himself and his rich buddies. He says whatever he needs to say to get the power and stay in power long enough to become dictator for life. All those things you say might be true, but he is not saying the because they are true, he says them so he can become "the great leader".

​@@someonespotatohmm9513 Thats literally the last sentence of the second paragraph of the comment you are replying to.

I very much agree, and I would very much like to see how he would feel having his country cut in third, disregarding his fellow nationals in doing so.

Sadly there is this strange divide in South America between nations with left-wing and right-wing goverments. If South America could just go pass idelogical division...

@@ominosentenzioso5100 This is something I always hated/disappointed me from UNASUR. It was supposed to be a South American light EU but instead, due to the lack of cooperation between members and our leaders' ideas of a leftist, united South America instead of just a more united one, is what lead to its eventual demise as left wing politicians were replaced by right wing ones.