Macron says Europe must "resist pressure to become America's followers" in China

[SnowLabrador]

I agree with this. Europe needs to fight their own war, and we'll fight ours.

[Florida Man for Crime]

I warned many on here that Macron was attempting to guide Europe away from American dependence. This is a bad thing for American interests, and the attempts to further strengthen the EU only further contribute to the possibility of a Eurosphere (great for Europe, terrible for the US)

This idiotic attitude is exactly what allows Macron to go on with bullsh*t like this. If the US was less obsessed with being the main character and lording over its allies, it would understand that a strong, autonomous EU would be an invaluable partner in achieving goals that are in their common interests. But no, instead we have this ridiculous dick-measuring contest among allies at a time where the global enemies of democracy are getting bolder than ever. You are part of the problem, my dude.

Yeah. Rather than seeking to put the breaks on European unity, over the long term (I am talking about probably at least ~30-100+ years into the future), we should start thinking about how we will expand on that sort of unity to forge Euro-American unity and integration instead (and also including other likeminded peoples in Asia, like South Korea, Japan, and Taiwan insofar as they wish to be included).

Prior to older communications and travel technology (the printing press, the railroad, etc), nationalism did not really exist, and people only really identified with (or knew) their local communities and their local lords. But those new technologies enabled the rise of nationalism in the 19th century along with the industrial revolution (and also starting somewhat before the 19th century).

But modern communications and travel technology, over time, has been having a tendency to weaken the force of nationalism. First among these is the internet (though it began in Europe especially even prior to he internet). This forum itself provides an example - we have posters from many countries, and by discussing things with each other, I think many of us come to see that we have in many cases at least as much in common with posters from other countries as to other people in our own countries.

One of the primary bases of nationalism, though not the only one, has been language. It is much easier to communicate with other people who speak the same language, and national identities were often forged around a shared national language (also notice we are all speaking English on this forum).

Now think to yourself what effects the rapid recent improvements in AI and machine language translation are likely to have in the future. I suspect in not such a long time, any random person in California will be able to converse and communicate just as easily with someone in France (or Japan) as with someone in New York, and that speech will be automatically translated accurately in an increasingly seamless and real time manner, even if we don't speak the same native (or 2nd) languages. The more that comes to be the case, the more we will naturally begin to view each other as compatriots, for many of the same reasons that people did so in the 19th century.

That has been happening and won't happen without fits and starts, without sometimes taking 2 steps forward and 3 steps back. But nevertheless, over time, that seems to me to be the direction things are still headed. I think this is also why politics in most western countries is oriented to divisions between, for lack of better terms, nationalists and globalists (globalists is not really the right term at this point, since people on that side of the divide don't actually identify as globalists, but importantly they do generally resist the description of "nationalist"). So maybe the divide is between "nationalists" and "normal modern liberally-minded people." This divide is related to education because more educated people are the ones most likely to be exposed to people from other countries in their everyday lives, due to the modern technological, economic, and social changes of the internet age.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

I warned many on here that Macron was attempting to guide Europe away from American dependence. This is a bad thing for American interests, and the attempts to further strengthen the EU only further contribute to the possibility of a Eurosphere (great for Europe, terrible for the US)

This idiotic attitude is exactly what allows Macron to go on with bullsh*t like this. If the US was less obsessed with being the main character and lording over its allies, it would understand that a strong, autonomous EU would be an invaluable partner in achieving goals that are in their common interests. But no, instead we have this ridiculous dick-measuring contest among allies at a time where the global enemies of democracy are getting bolder than ever. You are part of the problem, my dude.

Yeah. Rather than seeking to put the breaks on European unity, over the long term (I am talking about probably at least ~30-100+ years into the future), we should start thinking about how we will expand on that sort of unity to forge Euro-American unity and integration instead (and also including other likeminded peoples in Asia, like South Korea, Japan, and Taiwan insofar as they wish to be included).

Prior to older communications and travel technology (the printing press, the railroad, etc), nationalism did not really exist, and people only really identified with (or knew) their local communities and their local lords. But those new technologies enabled the rise of nationalism in the 19th century along with the industrial revolution (and also starting somewhat before the 19th century).

But modern communications and travel technology, over time, has been having a tendency to weaken the force of nationalism. First among these is the internet (though it began in Europe especially even prior to he internet). This forum itself provides an example - we have posters from many countries, and by discussing things with each other, I think many of us come to see that we have in many cases at least as much in common with posters from other countries as to other people in our own countries.

One of the primary bases of nationalism, though not the only one, has been language. It is much easier to communicate with other people who speak the same language, and national identities were often forged around a shared national language (also notice we are all speaking English on this forum).

Now think to yourself what effects the rapid recent improvements in AI and machine language translation are likely to have in the future. I suspect in not such a long time, any random person in California will be able to converse and communicate just as easily with someone in France (or Japan) as with someone in New York, and that speech will be automatically translated accurately in an increasingly seamless and real time manner, even if we don't speak the same native (or 2nd) languages. The more that comes to be the case, the more we will naturally begin to view each other as compatriots, for many of the same reasons that people did so in the 19th century.

That has been happening and won't happen without fits and starts, without sometimes taking 2 steps forward and 3 steps back. But nevertheless, over time, that seems to me to be the direction things are still headed. I think this is also why politics in most western countries is oriented to divisions between, for lack of better terms, nationalists and globalists (globalists is not really the right term at this point, since people on that side of the divide don't actually identify as globalists, but importantly they do generally resist the description of "nationalist"). So maybe the divide is between "nationalists" and "normal modern liberally-minded people." This divide is related to education because more educated people are the ones most likely to be exposed to people from other countries in their everyday lives, due to the modern technological, economic, and social changes of the internet age.

This could be very well where the world is headed.

On a sidenote, I (speaking for myself here) identify as an avid supporter of globalism, but not as a globalist (because it sounds weird). So should I be considered a globalist even if I technically don't share that self-ID?

[OSR stands with Israel]

The French are gonna be the French. Nothing new here. If the Europeans aren’t going to help us in Asia I don’t see the point of continuing to prop up Ukriane though. The whole point is to make them owe us.

No we should rather weaken the EU as a result of this

[ingemann]

I don’t expect many European boots on the ground in case of a American-Chinese War, but I expect that Europe will cut off the Belt and Road Initiate to the degree Europe is able to do so, at very least cutting off China from its biggest individual market, start general economic warfare against the Chinese, and support USA with materials, loans and by buying up dollars.

I also think that Macron sniffs his own farts.

[Kahane's Grave Is A Gender-Neutral Bathroom]

I warned many on here that Macron was attempting to guide Europe away from American dependence. This is a bad thing for American interests, and the attempts to further strengthen the EU only further contribute to the possibility of a Eurosphere (great for Europe, terrible for the US)

This idiotic attitude is exactly what allows Macron to go on with bullsh*t like this. If the US was less obsessed with being the main character and lording over its allies, it would understand that a strong, autonomous EU would be an invaluable partner in achieving goals that are in their common interests. But no, instead we have this ridiculous dick-measuring contest among allies at a time where the global enemies of democracy are getting bolder than ever. You are part of the problem, my dude.

Yeah. Rather than seeking to put the breaks on European unity, over the long term (I am talking about probably at least ~30-100+ years into the future), we should start thinking about how we will expand on that sort of unity to forge Euro-American unity and integration instead (and also including other likeminded peoples in Asia, like South Korea, Japan, and Taiwan insofar as they wish to be included).

Prior to older communications and travel technology (the printing press, the railroad, etc), nationalism did not really exist, and people only really identified with (or knew) their local communities and their local lords. But those new technologies enabled the rise of nationalism in the 19th century along with the industrial revolution (and also starting somewhat before the 19th century).

But modern communications and travel technology, over time, has been having a tendency to weaken the force of nationalism. First among these is the internet (though it began in Europe especially even prior to he internet). This forum itself provides an example - we have posters from many countries, and by discussing things with each other, I think many of us come to see that we have in many cases at least as much in common with posters from other countries as to other people in our own countries.

One of the primary bases of nationalism, though not the only one, has been language. It is much easier to communicate with other people who speak the same language, and national identities were often forged around a shared national language (also notice we are all speaking English on this forum).

Now think to yourself what effects the rapid recent improvements in AI and machine language translation are likely to have in the future. I suspect in not such a long time, any random person in California will be able to converse and communicate just as easily with someone in France (or Japan) as with someone in New York, and that speech will be automatically translated accurately in an increasingly seamless and real time manner, even if we don't speak the same native (or 2nd) languages. The more that comes to be the case, the more we will naturally begin to view each other as compatriots, for many of the same reasons that people did so in the 19th century.

That has been happening and won't happen without fits and starts, without sometimes taking 2 steps forward and 3 steps back. But nevertheless, over time, that seems to me to be the direction things are still headed. I think this is also why politics in most western countries is oriented to divisions between, for lack of better terms, nationalists and globalists (globalists is not really the right term at this point, since people on that side of the divide don't actually identify as globalists, but importantly they do generally resist the description of "nationalist"). So maybe the divide is between "nationalists" and "normal modern liberally-minded people." This divide is related to education because more educated people are the ones most likely to be exposed to people from other countries in their everyday lives, due to the modern technological, economic, and social changes of the internet age.

This could be very well where the world is headed.

On a sidenote, I (speaking for myself here) identify as an avid supporter of globalism, but not as a globalist (because it sounds weird). So should I be considered a globalist even if I technically don't share that self-ID?

Well, to many people being a 'globalist' is passed through matrilineal heritage.

[Middle-aged Europe]

I can tell you that the reaction of the German political elite (and mainstream media) to the Macron statements was largely one of annoyance and eye-rolling, raising suspicion that Emmanuel might be a China appeaser... and appeasers are not very popular these days. Reception was probably a bit more popular among AfD and Left Party ranks, but the standard shouldn't be to get the approval of the horseshoe faction.

"Senator, you're no Charles de Gaulle."

[All Along The Watchtower]

He says, after he and a large delegation of French businessmen come back from the PRC. Can’t imagine any less-than-altruistic motives there.

Stay classy, Macron.

[Middle-aged Europe]

I can tell you that the reaction of the German political elite (and mainstream media) to the Macron statements was largely one of annoyance and eye-rolling, raising suspicion that Emmanuel might be a China appeaser... and appeasers are not very popular these days. Reception was probably a bit more popular among AfD and Left Party ranks, but the standard shouldn't be to get the approval of the horseshoe faction.

"Senator, you're no Charles de Gaulle."

Correction: Except for Rolf Mützenich (SPD) who came out as a Macron fanboy now. Mützenich being vaguely anti-American/pro-Russia/pro-Chinese is probably the least surprising news of the week though.

[Red Velvet]

Whew, even France’s neolibs are more true leftists than the ones from Atlas.

Please. Even with this the western world is more closely united than the "GLOBAL SOUTH!!!!!!1!!"

IDK what to tell you if you don’t understand that in multipolar world order places can ally and not align on different issues simultaneously. The idea of “partners in everything” has become outdated and useless.

It’s obviously on France’s interest to create mechanisms that block Russian influence in Europe just like it is to diminish the US dollar hegemony in favor if more European independence. The Americans are useful way to serve as a way to block the geographical and political threat from Russia, but the EU and US are economic competitors.

Just like from my liberal and global south perspective, I do favor alignment with US on matters like democracy, environmental protection/cooperation and LGBT stuff we both agree on and that the Americans treat as a main priority over free trade agreements nowadays. While on economic matters, more independence should be pursuit which is why the Chinese and Global South growth is welcoming development as it allows more diversification of your portfolio. But we still need to drop the dollar for good instead of just talk (I’ll fully believe when I see it, but I don’t doubt the real intention is there).

These days it’s much better to have one feet on everything in case one relation goes wrong, you’re still safe. The US dollar shouldn’t be weakened in order to “stick it to the US” or anything, but to build this more equal representation that allows diversification. It’s on the interest of practically every country, even the ones in Europe, to do so.

[Zinneke]

Whew, even France’s neolibs are more true leftists than the ones from Atlas.

Please. Even with this the western world is more closely united than the "GLOBAL SOUTH!!!!!!1!!"

IDK what to tell you if you don’t understand that in multipolar world order places can ally and not align on different issues simultaneously. The idea of “partners in everything” has become outdated and useless.

It’s obviously on France’s interest to create mechanisms that block Russian influence in Europe just like it is to diminish the US dollar hegemony in favor if more European independence. The Americans are useful way to serve as a way to block the geographical and political threat from Russia, but the EU and US are economic competitors.

Just like from my liberal and global south perspective, I do favor alignment with US on matters like democracy, environmental protection/cooperation and LGBT stuff we both agree on and that the Americans treat as a main priority over free trade agreements nowadays. While on economic matters, more independence should be pursuit which is why the Chinese and Global South growth is welcoming development as it allows more diversification of your portfolio. But we still need to drop the dollar for good instead of just talk (I’ll fully believe when I see it, but I don’t doubt the real intention is there).

These days it’s much better to have one feet on everything in case one relation goes wrong, you’re still safe. The US dollar shouldn’t be weakened in order to “stick it to the US” or anything, but to build this more equal representation that allows diversification. It’s on the interest of practically every country, even the ones in Europe, to do so.

Yes, the trouble is in international diplomacy context matters. While its perfectly legitimate for Macron to engage in some neo-Titoism, we just had a maajor P5 power invade a neighbour a year ago and the situation with Taiwan is tense to say the least. The perfect way to discourage Xi Jingping to test his new shiny military is to at least "hint" that you are . When a hegemonic block like "the West" wants to discourage revisionism of the world order, it has to deter such powers from invading their neighbours.

Macron's strategy and rhetoric in general partially led to Putin's miscalculation that has already cost thousands of lives. When Putin sees people like Macron he sees decadent Western weakness, people who care more about the bottom line than History, geopolitics or humanist struggles. Macron is just a business school graduate type who has landed into the Presidency because LR ed their candidate choice. He's not some geopolitical grand strategist.

That being said, if the real "win" here is that China won't prop up the Russian military in Ukraine, then he did the right thing. But I doubt China can let Russia lose  more face in Ukraine. It would give their own neighbours ideas about sticking one to them.

[CumbrianLefty]

He's not some geopolitical grand strategist

Has anybody actually told him this, though?

[HillGoose]

why has Macron become an APPEASER and defender of the damn reds ? horrific !

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Whew, even France’s neolibs are more true leftists than the ones from Atlas.

Neoliberals have always been weak on China.

[Meclazine for Israel]

France exports a crap ton of creams, clothes and jewellery to China.

And China exports a crap ton of young couples to France also buying said creams, clothes and jewellery.

Young wealthy Chinese women can't get enough of French designer fashion.

[CumbrianLefty]

Whew, even France’s neolibs are more true leftists than the ones from Atlas.

Neoliberals have always been weak on China.

Yes, this is actually quite a pertinent point.

[Red Velvet]

Whew, even France’s neolibs are more true leftists than the ones from Atlas.

Neoliberals have always been weak on China.

While leftists otoh are not weak, but friendly towards China.

So you suggest the Trumpian far-right is the best solution to counter China? Even if they’re not as anti-Russia as the neolibs?