I must not think bad thoughts Blogging the rise of American Empire. |
In medieval Europe, dragons were considered mostly evil and a generally bad omen. Christianity linked the dragon with Satan because of the dragon's snake-like appearance. However, to the Orient cultures the dragon was a symbol of wisdom and royalty. It was a benign animal and the fifth creature of the Chinese zodiac. It resided over the east and the sunrise. It was also said to bring rain and the springtime. The dragon is interesting because it combines all four elements: air, earth, fire, and water. It could fly, had the horns of a ox, breathed fire, and resided over the moon.
What mythical beast best represents you?Take the quiz!
The Paradoxes of American Nationalism
Nationalism in the United States is defined not by notions of ethnic superiority but by a firm belief in the supremacy of U.S. democratic ideals. This rejection of Old World nationalism has created a dual paradox in the American psyche: First, although the United States is highly nationalistic, it doesn't see itself as such. Second, despite this nationalistic fervor, U.S. policymakers fail to appreciate the power of nationalism abroad. By Minxin Pei
Financial Policy and the EU
Sorry if I was not terribly clear about how EU finances work (thank you, Herr Doktor Johnny.)
Perhaps the greatest problem that has confronted the European Union and its predecessors has been the coordination of monetary policies. One of the most infamous inflations in history, the German Great Inflation of 1923- 4, is one example. Since the 1950s, the western European states have sought to coordinate their financial policies in order to support the health of the entire system and to avoid trade wars between member states. The major concerns have always involved inflation and debt. Their have always been specific limits as to how much the national debt of any one state can grow with respect to GDP and how much currency can be devalued. There are no specific guidelines as to states can spend the moneys that are either achieved through taxes and borrowing. Should a state plan to violate the EU limits, it becomes a matter for interstate diplomacy: others states adjust their currencies and financial policies so that the shifts are not as shocking to their economies. The European Currency Unit, the predecessor to the Euro, is an example of monetary diplomacy. Whenever a state (usually France) desired to devalue a currency in order to encourage exports, others would adjust their policies to compensate. The effect was described as "the Snake." Ultimately, these are only targets: they do not dictate the fine details of how national economies would run.
The Euro is a different matter. It started as a German project because its citizens were alarmed by the implications of the Deutsch Mark becoming a reserve currency (they actually cared about hurting people in foreign countries.) This also merged with their efforts to keep debts down throughout Europe (Germans fear that debts cause destabilization, which is largely true.) The states that currently belong to the Euro zone have adjusted their economies to take into account the debt and inflation limitations such that they can support national health care programs. Britain, which has remained nationalistic and refuses to acknowledge the grander vision of the Union, has never adjusted its policies and has always been the EU laggard. Its health care is comprehensive and universal, but it depends on excessive borrowing where those of France, etc., do not. The larger problem, however, for Britain is not that its health care is too expensive, but it has not adjusted financial policies (as well as business strategies) to support it. I will admit that this may not be fair. Britain has reached a high-level equilibrium trap: its economy cannot reform. But Britain needs to join the Euro in order to survive. Its deficits and borrowing will not currently permit it. Britain can do what it wants, snubbing the EU and further damaging their economy in the process.
The good news is that whatever is left of the British comprehensive health care system will probably be better than whatever the US has.
Mike Watt is coming to town
1. House of Rothschild by Niall Ferguson. Perhaps one of the five best histories ever written, combining economics with culture, race relations, diplomacy, ... .
2. The Peaceful Conquest by Sidney Pollard. It concerns the industrialization of Europe, giving the best account of how industry emerged on the continent.
3. The First Modern Economy by Jan de Vries. Awesome, but long book, explaining how the Dutch perfected mercantile capitalism and the supporting political institutions but could neither invent nor import industrialization.
4. The Reconstruction of Western Europe by Alan Milward. Explains how American capital was used, why France and Germany benefitted from it more than Britain, and how ineffective the Marshall Plan was in moving forward American reconstruction policies (the rearmament of Germany was the real motivating force.)
5. The Origins of Economic Backwardness in Eastern Europe edited by David Chirot. This edited volume has essays concerning the theories of economics and government of Alexander Gerschenkron. He postulated that economic elites better resist political reform if they are based in agricultural economies that lack a significant production phase (that they are largely rent-seekers.)