December 31, 2002
WHO'S PULLING THE STRING?:
In Praise of Penelope: Prodi's Project and the Undoing of the European Union (Marian L. Tupy, December 30, 2002, Cato)Penelope, the ancient myth tells us, was the beautiful wife of a Greek hero, King Odysseus. When her husband went to fight the Trojans, Penelope stayed behind on the island of Ithaca. For 20 years she remained faithful to Odysseus. Eventually, a number of determined suitors descended on Ithaca to marry her and with her to gain Odysseus's crown. The ever-faithful Penelope devised an ingenious way of delaying having to make a decision on re-marrying. She announced that she would remarry after the completion of a funeral canopy of Laertes, Odysseus's father. During the day she worked at the robe, but in the night she undid the work of the day. The above myth is the origin of the famous Penelope's web - a proverbial expression denoting anything which is perpetually doing but never done.Penelope has been in the news recently. This time, "Penelope" is the code word for a draft of the EU constitution prepared for the president of the European Commission, Romano Prodi. The constitution, Prodi hopes, will bring the European states closer together and create what will in essence be a federal super-state. Why did Prodi choose "Penelope" to name his pet project?
Unfortunately, one fears it's a noose rather than a robe that they're working on and that the Euros will be all to happy to stick their collective head in it. Posted by Orrin Judd at December 31, 2002 5:47 PM
Anyone who thinks that progress is inevitable should consider the fact that it is simply impossible for people in 2003 to write as good a constitution as people in 1787.
Posted by: David Cohen at December 31, 2002 6:53 PMCuriously enough, the euro was selling for
103 cents last week.
I am not sure why Europe even wants to be
a superstate. When it was not destroying
itself, it was a very effective society, and
since 1945 it has not been destroying itself.
As a collection of small states competing
moderately among themselves, Europe worked
very well. If it ain't broke, why fix it?
Harry:
Europhiles would argue that by creating a superstate, they'll minimise the chance of Europeans going to war against each other again since we'll all be one big, happy family.
I had a professor once who taught that after the Thirty Years War, no one in Europe thought it worthwhile to fight over religion any more. He was wrong on the facts, but there was something to the argument that people do learn by experience.
Although I wouldn't give a plug nickel for the idea that Germany will not eventually seek revision of its eastern border at the expense of the Poles, and the Balkans are doomed forever, it is hard to imagine western Europe going to war again.
Times change. In the 1920s, the British were seriously concerned about how they would fight a war with the United States. Seems quaint now.
The end of imperialism had a lot of bad effects, but it did at least cut down the opportunies for open warfare among the truly potent states.
Harry:
It's actually quite easy to imagine. Either France or Germany embarks on a genocide and relocation of its emerging Muslim majority. The other fails to do so and becomes an Islamic state. War follows.