Monarchy Forum
Sign up Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 2 of 4      Prev   1   2   3   4   Next
Peter

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 7,105
Reply with quote  #16 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bator


i have never heard about bulgarians to be of iranic origin. they are slavs mixed with a turkic people who gave the name to the country, and descend from the volga bulgars, from whom as far as i know also the chuvash descend, who have kept their original turkic language unlike the balkan bulgars who assimilated into the slavs and sarted speaking slavic and leaving few traces. like the name of the country.

There is a theory that the Bulgars were Iranic rather than Turkish, which as far as I can make out is mainly based on the presence of Iranic loanwords in modern Bulgarian. Turkic origin however seems supported by a far better and wider range of evidence, and appears to be the general scholarly consensus. The loanwords can easily be accounted for by Ottoman influence, and the Iranic-origin theory is attributed by some to lingering anti-Turkish feeling.
azadi

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 814
Reply with quote  #17 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wessexman
Ok. I don't see the direct relevance of Russia or most of that to the specific discussion you and I were engaged in. You mostly seem to have gone back to your litanies of views vaguely related.

Given the vast powers and competencies the EU already enjoys (it is de facto Britain's supreme and most prolific legislature), I'm not sure I'd describe your position as Eurosceptic in any sense.

My position is Eurosceptic, because I want Germany to leave the Eurozone, and I'm opposed to a common EU army, while I support the current level of EU defence cooperation. I want the Bundeswehr to remain an independent army, and I want the Mark back. Having an independent army and an independent currency is necessary in order to be an independent state.
Russia is relevant to this discussion, because Great Britain is an Atlanticist Trojan horse in the EU. De Gaulle also considered Great Britain to be an Atlanticist Trojan horse in the EU. I want Great Britain to leave the EU, because I'm opposed to Atlanticism, and because Great Britain is culturally closer to Australia, Canada and USA than to continental Europe.
But I support friendly relations between the EU and Great Britain. That's why I'm opposed to a no deal Brexit. I want an amicable divorce between Great Britain and the EU, not a hostile divorce. 
Murtagon

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 96
Reply with quote  #18 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bator


i have never heard about bulgarians to be of iranic origin. they are slavs mixed with a turkic people who gave the name to the country, and descend from the volga bulgars, from whom as far as i know also the chuvash descend, who have kept their original turkic language unlike the balkan bulgars who assimilated into the slavs and sarted speaking slavic and leaving few traces. like the name of the country.


That's a generally discredited theory. I remember having a similar conversation with Azadi on the matter. The current widely-spread theory is that the "original" Bulgarians were an Iranic, and not Turkic, tribe. Of course, they intermixed with the local Slavs and maybe a Thracian here and there. Genetic research generally shows a close relationship with "Macedonians", Romanians and the Gagauz people. As for the Volga Bulgarians, I'm afraid I cannot remember enough to hold a proper discussion. Sorry.

On topic, I've seen the Euro being mentioned. I recall talking about this with some of my professors:

1) Those who created the Eurozone made a loophole, according to which future member-states of the EU would be required to adopt the Euro at some point in the future, when they have fulfilled several criteria.

2) Denmark doesn't have to join the Eurozone. Even if it does, it can opt out.

3) Greece falsified its economic results, so that it could join the Eurozone.

A year ago, I went to a Prague college, all thanks to the Erasmus+ programme. Long story short, one of my subjects was "European Union". There were Spanish and Portuguese people there, as well. They were of the opinion that Bulgaria should also join the Eurozone, because "that would be better for us".

It should be noted that I showed them an interview with Prof. Steve Hanke. I think it was this one: link. They were obvously unimpressed.

P. S. I see that Peter and Azadi have already posted. Oh well.
azadi

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 814
Reply with quote  #19 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Murtagon


That's a generally discredited theory. I remember having a similar conversation with Azadi on the matter. The current widely-spread theory is that the "original" Bulgarians were an Iranic, and not Turkic, tribe. Of course, they intermixed with the local Slavs and maybe a Thracian here and there. Genetic research generally shows a close relationship with "Macedonians", Romanians and the Gagauz people. As for the Volga Bulgarians, I'm afraid I cannot remember enough to hold a proper discussion. Sorry.

On topic, I've seen the Euro being mentioned. I recall talking about this with some of my professors:

1) Those who created the Eurozone made a loophole, according to which future member-states of the EU would be required to adopt the Euro at some point in the future, when they have fulfilled several criteria.

2) Denmark doesn't have to join the Eurozone. Even if it does, it can opt out.

3) Greece falsified its economic results, so that it could join the Eurozone.

A year ago, I went to a Prague college, all thanks to the Erasmus+ programme. Long story short, one of my subjects was "European Union". There were Spanish and Portuguese people there, as well. They were of the opinion that Bulgaria should also join the Eurozone, because "that would be better for us".

It should be noted that I showed them an interview with Prof. Steve Hanke. I think it was this one: link. They were obvously unimpressed.

P. S. I see that Peter and Azadi have already posted. Oh well.

I hope Bulgaria refuses to join the Eurozone. Sweden, Poland and Hungary refuses to join the Eurozone, despite formally being required to do it at some point in the future.
Wessexman

Registered:
Posts: 1,436
Reply with quote  #20 
That a strange use of Eurosceptic to me, as the term rather implies a scepticism towards the project itself. Many British Europhiles would be embarrassed to argue for the degree of integration you describe as a moderate Euroscepticism.

De Gaulle made a big fuss about Britain's difference from the continent, which is true enough. But this wasn't really his primary motivation, as Booker and North document in their The Great Deception. He was more interested in getting France very generous terms in the CAP that was being drawn up at the time, and feared Britain would be an obstacle. This is actually why Pompidou reversed the French position: the CAP was already set up and Britain could be obliged to honour it in its accession agreement. Then France actually wanted Britain to join partly because it would be a net contributor to the CAP, which is what happened. De Gaulle and France bear perhaps the largest burden for the continual fiasco of the CAP.

On the Euro, they dropped the entry conditions for quite a few of the countries who originally joined. That's because its primary purpose is political. I think even Germany itself went beyond the budgetary range that had been layed down in the year or two before the currency was introduced, if I recall correctly.

azadi

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 814
Reply with quote  #21 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wessexman
That a strange use of Eurosceptic to me, as the term rather implies a scepticism towards the project itself. Many British Europhiles would be embarrassed to argue for the degree of integration you describe as a moderate Euroscepticism.

De Gaulle made a big fuss about Britain's difference from the continent, which is true enough. But this wasn't really his primary motivation, as Booker and North document in their The Great Deception. He was more interested in getting France very generous terms in the CAP that was being drawn up at the time, and feared Britain would be an obstacle. This is actually why Pompidou reversed the French position: the CAP was already set up and Britain could be obliged to honour it in its accession agreement. Then France actually wanted Britain to join partly because it would be a net contributor to the CAP, which is what happened. De Gaulle and France bear perhaps the largest burden for the continual fiasco of the CAP.

On the Euro, they dropped the entry conditions for quite a few of the countries who originally joined. That's because its primary purpose is political. I think even Germany itself went beyond the budgetary range that had been layed down in the year or two before the currency was introduced, if I recall correctly.


I have never claimed to be a Eurosceptic by British standards, but I'm a Eurosceptic by German standards.
De Gaulle was actually opposed to Atlanticism. He withdrew France from the integrated command structure of NATO, and France developed its own nukes during his presidency. Who are Booker and North?
I sincerely want you to leave the EU, because I'm opposed to Atlanticism, and because British membership of the EU is a threat to the Windsor monarchies of Australia and Canada. While I prefer Australia and Canada electing their own Windsor monarchs, I prefer the British monarch remaining head of state of Australia and Canada to Australia and Canada becoming republics.

Wessexman

Registered:
Posts: 1,436
Reply with quote  #22 
Ok. But that seems to be like saying one is conservative by communist standards. It seems a rather bizarre use of the turn Eurosceptic, as what's actually being described is a position supportive of the massive integration that's already occured plus some extra integration. That it isn't as fanatical as the most extreme Eurofanatics isn't much. I would suggest the term Eurosceptic etymologically suggests a certain degree of absolute meaning as well as relative - it suggests one is fundamentally sceptical about considerable European integration.

I didn't say De Gualle wasn't against Atlanticism, simply that it wasn't his true motive in opposing Britain's entry into the European Community.
azadi

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 814
Reply with quote  #23 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wessexman
Ok. But that seems to be like saying one is conservative by communist standards. It seems a rather bizarre use of the turn Eurosceptic, as what's actually being described is a position supportive of the massive integration that's already occured plus some extra integration. That it isn't as fanatical as the most extreme Eurofanatics isn't much. I would suggest the term Eurosceptic etymologically suggests a certain degree of absolute meaning as well as relative - it suggests one is fundamentally sceptical about considerable European integration.

I didn't say De Gualle wasn't against Atlanticism, simply that it wasn't his true motive in opposing Britain's entry into the European Community.

British-style Euroscepticism is insignificant in Germany, and it's even insignificant in Eurosceptic member states of the EU, such as Poland, Hungary, Denmark and Sweden. Opposition to joining the Eurozone and opposition to further European integration is called soft Euroscepticism, while wanting to leave the EU is called hard Euroscepticism. 

Wessexman

Registered:
Posts: 1,436
Reply with quote  #24 
Well this is getting tedious, but my point was about what the word itself suggests, etymologically. Soft Euroscepticism here looks very soft indeed. It leaves huge amounts of integration in place, and, in your case, even wants a bit a more. How it's used in Germany or whatever doesn't affect these points. We might consider a change in usage, but as the word is being used by different people in different countries in very different, not especially compatible ways, I think it fair game to comment on these.
MatthewJTaylor

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 156
Reply with quote  #25 
The contrast between british (C&UP) and german (AFD) euroscepticism can be seen clearly in this video from Channel 4:

__________________
ceterum censeo caetum europaeum delendum esse
The Scottish Tory - https://sites.google.com/view/scottishtory
Scots for a French Royal Restoration - https://sites.google.com/view/sfrr
azadi

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 814
Reply with quote  #26 
Great Britain opposed the return of Russia to the parliamentary assembly of the Council of Europe, while Germany and France supported the return of Russia to the parliamentary assembly of the Council of Europe.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/russia-sanctions-council-europe-ukraine-crimea-echr-human-rights-malaysian-airlines-a8973791.html

azadi

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 814
Reply with quote  #27 
France is a far more aggressive state than Germany is. France wants to establish a common EU army and France supports PYD, the Syrian branch of PKK, a Kurdish Communist terrorist movement. The real threat to Europe is French domination, not German domination. I no longer support European military integration. Germany ought to fight French imperialism and establish friendly relations with Russia. 
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/nov/07/macron-warns-of-nato-brain-death-as-us-turns-its-back-on-allies

Wessexman

Registered:
Posts: 1,436
Reply with quote  #28 
Why are you being Francophobic?
azadi

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 814
Reply with quote  #29 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wessexman
Why are you being Francophobic?

Disliking the foreign policy of the French government doesn't mean, that I hate France as a nation or that I hate the French people. 
TuiMangareva

Registered:
Posts: 50
Reply with quote  #30 
Quote:
Originally Posted by azadi
Great Britain opposed the return of Russia to the parliamentary assembly of the Council of Europe, while Germany and France supported the return of Russia to the parliamentary assembly of the Council of Europe.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/russia-sanctions-council-europe-ukraine-crimea-echr-human-rights-malaysian-airlines-a8973791.html



It is the United Kingdom that is a member of the EU, not Great Britain. The UK and GB are not the same thing.
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.