I think you may be missing some fundamental facts and differences about the European Union (EU). I agree the EU is a bloated, inefficient and massively expensive carbuncle sitting on top of the Europe of nation-states, although it has brought huge benefits to its members so far, such as EU wide standards and open markets within the group. I suspect it will decline as economies retrench, starting with an end to the Schengen free movement of people across internal borders, and a shift to a more military role as Europe invests more in its own security.
But you are missing the point that a collapse of the EU would actually change little for most of the countries in it, because they ARE nation states, and, where the EU laws are enacted, they are adopted at nation state level, so the beneficial ones would simply continue as before.
So now we need to look at the states themselves.
Germany, for example, is in deep trouble because it was reliant on cheap energy from Russia and closed its nuclear power stations before it had invested enough in renewables to compensate. It now has a collapse of energy production and high energy prices, so a collapse in manufacturing and of inward investment, and a collapse in faith in the failed and weak government. It will take it at least a decade to recover, if ever.
By contrast, France has an electricity supply from nuclear 70% and hydro 15% and the rest was fossils, now being replaced by wind and solar. It produces excess energy and sells it to its neighbours, it produces a net excess of food and sells that abroad as high value produce too. And it has had an industrial self sufficiency mantra since De Gaulle was President post WW2. It even has one of the biggest start-up hubs in the world, Station F in Paris, that no-one seems to have heard of.
What I'm saying here is that the differences in each country in the EU mean that the EU issues will have much more granular effects than you suggest. Unlike America, for example, where a collapse in the federal structure would wipe out the finances of all the States that are so dependant of federal funding and administrations, a collapse in the EU would have far less impact.
In fact Americans are likely to find out next year just what a 30% cut in Federal government spending will mean in Their State, city, town, neighbourhood, and family. If ever there was a situation of complexity collapsing.........
Amongst the EU countries there are republics, monarchies, different forms of democracies, two-party and multi-party systems, one-person-one -vote systems and more. There are left wing, centrist and right wing governments, all the way to multi-party coalitions from communists and hard left to far right, and some that change collaborations almost annually.
Each one adopts the EU rules and standards, and most (but not all) use the Euro currency with it's financial rules, into their own legal systems that also vary widely.
But when all is said and done, each country has a government and civil service that runs its own country, and if the EU faded away, most would continue to do so.
All that said, when the Euro was first proposed I thought it would make a lot of sense for countries to run their own currencies in parallel for a few years, even permanently, because of the problem of differing economic cycles and rules about deficits and interest rates. That was the issue with the collapse of Greece - it was able to borrow huge sums at low interest rates as an EU and Euro member, when its economy should have had high interest rates to curb borrowing. Those stresses still remain, with few countries wanting the economic straitjacket of common economic policies.
I am in France because are the most basic level, this region of France can probably function as an economically viable region even if the EU disintegrated, and even if the French government collapsed. It has always produced surpluses of food and was wealthy in medieval times (always a good indicator). It has local hydro electricity. It has good sea trading links, good rainfall, mild climate, low risk of heatwaves, and so much more that makes it more resilient than almost anywhere else I can think of.
I am unconcerned about Germany's problems, not least because the shift of companies and the shift in political power to France is good for France! I'm not that concerned in the short term about Ukraine - if Trump forces a peace on current boundaries, that war will stop. It will be years before Putin would try to go further.
My main concerns are the accelerating climate crises in relation to where I live now, the possibility of a new pandemic, and the imminent financial crash, probably triggered by Trump's presidency. That's enough to worry about for the moment.
You are an idiot. Climate crisis, new pandemic... What can one say other than laugh about how much of a cretin you must be to be concerned about a fakery like climate change and still believe anything about the plan-demic stories. I thought even cretins won't buy the story of two pandemics less than a decade apart but the level of gullibility and stupidity some of you have is astonishing.
a little question ugo when do you think europe would collapse you say before the usa but then you say by 2030 we would go from 27 member states to 35 member states this does not make many sense and what does agenda 2030 mean why 2030 the same deadline as earth4all to create a planet for all ?
Yes another fake pandemic would be pushing it Joe Doe but only a cretin would believe the climate crrisis denials deliberately circulated on social media by legacy industries.
You might be right in your conclusions regarding collapse in US and EU taking very different forms as indeed both political structures are quite different. US being more integrated they might be stronger but also collapse with a bigger crash.
But I believe you're also harbouring some misconceptions along the way.
The economy in Germany is not collapsing because Germans didn't invested enough in renewables. But because their whole wacky renewable plan could only works with a lot of cheap natgaz they don't have anymore. Ten years recovery is a minimum. Given the overall situation, it could well be terminal.
And the French economy is everything but industrially self-sufficient. This is old story from the 60s maybe. It's now decades that the mantra states that France will be much better off without industry. And now France is even loosing fast its age-old agricultural self-sufficiency. And it is not a few start-up pet projects that will make the difference. Nuclear energy is the only real (short term) advantage left. To the point that the Germans are doing all they can at the European level to offset it...
I disagree about France and industry, at two levels; at the local level this small village is close to three large industrial estates, a major port for ferries, raw material imports and fishing exports, and a thriving city, all connected to the TGV high speed rail system and autoroutes. It is a thriving manufacturing, farming, food production and export area, and has considerable resilience because of that.
On the bigger level, French industry benefits from relatively cheap electricity from nuclear and hydro, so for example, can produce aluminium almost as cheaply as steel. Industrial energy prices are a key part of production costs and it is a major advantage over Germany, Britain, Spain, Italy, and many others.
True. Industry haven't disappeared totally and some area might still look prosperous.
Still industry went from 30% of the GPD in the 60s (for all that GPD is worth) to stagnating between 20 and 15% for something like 20 years now. Agricultural GPD crashed even more while commercial sector (that is selling stuff that is mostly not produced in France and purchased on credit) soared to 70%.
It is a complicated story. It is true that the common market and the single monetary system was a big benefit for member states. They may not be so strictly integrated with the European system as the US states are with the federal system. But it is to be seen how they'll fare once they are on their own. It is a law of markets that big fish eat small fish.
Germans knew their industrial economy couldn't rely on renewable energy alone. Whatever they could do regarding that. Local climate and industrial physics just doesn't add up.
But in the same time, their American suzerain repeatedly warned them that it would not tolerate their strategical emancipation by importing cheap Russian natgaz.
And still these fools did it. They though that the US didn't really have the means or will to stop them anymore. And they were wrong. The US had the Ukrainian card in their sleeve all along...
The problem wasn't that Germany was reliant on affordable Russia gas, it was that the US blew up the NS2 and deliberately enticed German industry to the States and paid Baerbock and Sholtz to trash nuclear- all because they'd rather see Germany and thus the EU destroyed than flourish by trading with Russia.
I looked at your reposts. You think everything is a conspiracy. That leads you down the rabbit hole until you can't believe anything and your foundations crumble away. It is a path to loneliness and craziness in the real world.
I disagree with you - generally I have found the simplest answer is the right answer unless there is actual evidence (not opinions or internet theories) to the contrary. Generally people make mistakes, have background mundane reasons for decisions we haven't considered, and groups of people talk themselves into decisions for the wrong reasons. Often people in positions of power aren't very bright.
While you make some interesting observations about individual member states' resilience, I think you're underestimating how deeply EU integration has transformed national sovereignty. The "beneficial laws" you mention aren't simply individual policies that can be cherry-picked post-dissolution - they're part of an interconnected system that has fundamentally altered how European nations function.
Take monetary policy, for example. Eurozone countries have surrendered their ability to manage their own currency and interest rates. This isn't just a "beneficial law" that can be casually maintained - it's a fundamental surrender of national economic sovereignty that has created deep structural dependencies. The same applies to trade relationships, which are now entirely mediated through EU structures.
Your comparison with the US federal system actually supports this point, though not in the way you intended. The EU has gradually created similar dependencies, but without the democratic legitimacy or constitutional framework that undergirds the American system. European nations haven't just adopted helpful standards - they've been systematically integrated into a supranational structure that is increasingly difficult to disentangle.
Germany's current energy crisis, which you correctly identify, illustrates this perfectly. Its predicament isn't just about domestic policy choices - it's about how EU-level decisions on energy policy, emissions trading, and Russian sanctions have constrained national sovereignty and limited member states' ability to pursue independent solutions.
This suggests that any "collapse" would be far more consequential than a simple reversion to pre-EU arrangements. The challenge isn't just maintaining "beneficial" regulations - it's about reconstructing national sovereignty in a context where it has been systematically dismantled.
One obvious symptom of the "souverainism" you mention is the growing number of individual countries reimposing border controls to cope with the migrant problem. One by one they are giving up on the Schengen zone idea because the center is failing to cope with the issue.
You're quite right, I was trying to be generous in my wording. I'd say another symptom of what Ugo is talking about is the increasing failure of our legal system. In the case of immigration, laws the authorities don't like are ignored rather than changed. For example: In the US, ignoring immigration law is becoming a widespread phenomenon. There is insufficient popular support for unlimited immigration, so while saying we need "common sense" immigration reform, authorities simply admit Illegals rather than turning them back, and many political jurisdictions have declared themselves "sanctuaries" despite its illegality.
It's the same in Europe. There are laws which are just intentionally emptied of their content.
For exemple, as in any other country, foreigners are not supposed to stay in Europe without a valid visa. But, thanks to some EU regulation, doing so is not an offense anymore. So people are somehow allowed to stay in some organized legal limbo nobody understand exactly what is means...
I'm afraid European political elites don't even have the mindset to change course. And more to the point to try to improve relations with their main potential supplier of energy and raw ressources they uselessly turned a bitter enemy at their very own door.
They are far too convinced of the intrinsic superiority of the European liberal model to do so. They are now so disconnected from their historical origins and values they can't even imagine that some populations (be there from Crimea, Donbass or Georgia but also from any European countries) will refuse to join their wonderful post-national European Utopia and would rather favour their own historical origins and cultural connections. They are just backward far-right stupid people who just deserve to be educated, bullied, silenced or replaced.
Of course, I might be proved wrong.
But I do believe they would rather maintain any failed economic sanctions for the sake of them. Even at the cost of the whole Western Europe economy. And, being Good facing Evil, they will destroy by any means available any political opponent that might object.
And, of course, they have a Plan B. Like any aristocrats of the past, they have the conviction that their superior moral values, their money and their worldwide connections will allow them to leave the place if things really goes belly-up. So why bother with Tainter's law ?...
even gaya herrington stated on the channel from sera tajima that the next 5 years will determine or welbeing for the rest of the century she even stated we have 5 years to turn things around like many club of rome members said before me
Fuck the club of rome and their lies and disguised satanism. And fuck all the fools still believing their bullshit. There is a booster you haven't taken recently. Don't forget to be fully "vaccinated" for the coming influence season. The club of rome will appreciate that.
I feel like there will be no "end" to EU, China or USA, Russia is still there almost immutable as when was the foundation of URSS. What is keeping these institutions is the lack of alternative systems that work equally or better, we have a lot of competing memetic systems around still the Cold War core is still the most viable to the majority of his populace: we track migration as indicator because people tend to move from a memetic system to one that is "better" so we know that our imperfect living place is still better compared to alternative.
Our is a failing system, but personally feel like our "saviors" like Trump and others are a perfect product of the same defects that we want to correct, they are grown in a resource rich environment made by a society that they never had to take part to (no labor class experience) so they are thinking and analyzing as the nobles of the royal court of Louis XVI. We see a coordinated filing of both the liberal solutions like Argentine and planned economy like China, the answer proposed in MAGA that is a supposed time machine to "bring back good Old Days" but with our new improved "good guys", people grown in the financial paradise blessed by great social skills and hyper communicative....
We could dry all swamps and take off bureaucracy, freeing people from taxes and regulations, and go straight to paradise states like banana republics, could free people to drill any patch of fossil viable (but we are just doing it now) and hope that we could go back to the 50's cheap oil and understand that fossil is not eternal and so on. Maybe that we must understand that the "swamp" is also the enforcing of environmental, work safety and public health regulations, some of the biggest danger to business.
EU was the last try for a region that had burned up ALL is resources during TWO WW, Europe had used up all so now is trying to survive on what have that is a potential for renewable and a lot of social stability. They are failing in this but is not a defect of purpose, we are in the first globalized, coordinated bubble burst of anything, globalization have coordinated all the world synchronizing the economic cycles so also the burst ones so today no economy is in boom when other are in burst!
As indicator of global meltdown we could use the fertility rates, they are falling trought the world without any exception, this could be linked to a recessionary force that is universal because based on the law of diminishing returns: recession coul be described as poor acces to expendable free salary that is also what children are feed from...
An excellent analysis that highlights the inherent contradictions of the EU project. Your parallel between bureaucratic complexity and energy costs is particularly insightful, as it demonstrates how the EU's pursuit of "ever closer union" actually undermines its sustainability.
While you focus on translation as a concrete example of escalating complexity, there's another critical aspect worth considering: the increasing difficulty of maintaining democratic legitimacy across an expanding union. Each new layer of bureaucracy and each additional member state further distances decision-making from national parliaments and citizens, creating not just administrative inefficiency but a fundamental crisis of democratic accountability.
Your comparison with imperial structures is especially relevant here. The EU seems caught in an impossible position - unable to function efficiently as a confederation of equal states, yet politically incapable of transforming into a hierarchical empire. This may explain why we're seeing increasing support for national sovereignty movements across member states - citizens instinctively understand that their democratic voice becomes increasingly diluted with each expansion of EU authority.
What's so sad about this warning is that the logic is so compelling. I was greatly impressed with Tainter's book, The Collapse of Complex Societiess, and his treatment of Average versus Marginal returns. Bravo, Sig. Bardi!
"EU mirrors both the USSR and the US. It is a huge bureaucratic organization ruled by an incompetent elite whose main purpose is to enrich various corporate sharks, inside and outside Europe. In addition, it has specific problems. The EU has little or no internal mineral resources; it mostly relies on imports. Since it has no army of its own, the depletion problem is unsolvable by the same methods that allowed the US and the URSS to survive a little more: increasing internal production, and use military means to control or intimidate foreign producers. So, it is likely that the next large state organization to follow the USSR down the Seneca Cliff will not be the US, but the EU."
dr nafeez ahmed said that the usa would collapse if they stay on fossil fuels and deport 20 million imigrants from the food and textail sector between 20 januari 2025 and 2028 they would lose 25 % of gdp ?
Every year? Are you an anti vaxxer??? You should take them every couple of months or so. And what about the covid boosters? Four or five per year as per cdc reccomandation. If you don't have at least 12 covid shots in you by now, you truly are nothing more than a science denier, anti vaxxer, putinist.
An interesting mathematical based theorem. I believe the physics of complexity theory would also apply. I am a "researcher" of culture and philosophy of ideas. I think that we can see this happen in all nation states throughout history although I do not have as much knowledge or expertise in eastern culture; however, I can see from the states of China and India, Who have older nation states perhaps than Mesopotamian, Greek, Roman and Egyptian ones, that decline and entropy resulting in bureaucracy are the patterns. I was struck in your post post by your initial description because it sounded a lot like the late Roman Republic which is why of course the Roman proletariat types, "the people," welcomed Caesar as dictator, but in this case, the bourgeoise killed him to "save the Republic" instead of kissing the ring initiating Civil War and prolonging the entry into the stage military dictatorship, which frankly, is a main driver, for the reason why Christianity went viral when it did: impoverished poor in a war torn nation whose fate depended on power grabbing oligarchs were without hope.
People compare Trump to J Caesar but he does not compare on any level, though because of his ego-inflation, like Napoleon, he probably sees himself that way and because his followers have a cult-like adoration of him, they referred to him in that light.
In my opinion, the Liberal Left/Conservative Right idealism conflict, with it archetypal and team sports model, is providing an excellent smoke screen for the purchase of the entire earth by wealthy elite oligarchs, essentially white collar crime. I think that it is obvious that because we are so busy looking at their puppet shows and war games.
if earth4all say we have until 2030 we have until 2030 otherwise the club of rome would not have published the book carlos alvarez pereira even said read the book
I think you may be missing some fundamental facts and differences about the European Union (EU). I agree the EU is a bloated, inefficient and massively expensive carbuncle sitting on top of the Europe of nation-states, although it has brought huge benefits to its members so far, such as EU wide standards and open markets within the group. I suspect it will decline as economies retrench, starting with an end to the Schengen free movement of people across internal borders, and a shift to a more military role as Europe invests more in its own security.
But you are missing the point that a collapse of the EU would actually change little for most of the countries in it, because they ARE nation states, and, where the EU laws are enacted, they are adopted at nation state level, so the beneficial ones would simply continue as before.
So now we need to look at the states themselves.
Germany, for example, is in deep trouble because it was reliant on cheap energy from Russia and closed its nuclear power stations before it had invested enough in renewables to compensate. It now has a collapse of energy production and high energy prices, so a collapse in manufacturing and of inward investment, and a collapse in faith in the failed and weak government. It will take it at least a decade to recover, if ever.
By contrast, France has an electricity supply from nuclear 70% and hydro 15% and the rest was fossils, now being replaced by wind and solar. It produces excess energy and sells it to its neighbours, it produces a net excess of food and sells that abroad as high value produce too. And it has had an industrial self sufficiency mantra since De Gaulle was President post WW2. It even has one of the biggest start-up hubs in the world, Station F in Paris, that no-one seems to have heard of.
What I'm saying here is that the differences in each country in the EU mean that the EU issues will have much more granular effects than you suggest. Unlike America, for example, where a collapse in the federal structure would wipe out the finances of all the States that are so dependant of federal funding and administrations, a collapse in the EU would have far less impact.
In fact Americans are likely to find out next year just what a 30% cut in Federal government spending will mean in Their State, city, town, neighbourhood, and family. If ever there was a situation of complexity collapsing.........
Amongst the EU countries there are republics, monarchies, different forms of democracies, two-party and multi-party systems, one-person-one -vote systems and more. There are left wing, centrist and right wing governments, all the way to multi-party coalitions from communists and hard left to far right, and some that change collaborations almost annually.
Each one adopts the EU rules and standards, and most (but not all) use the Euro currency with it's financial rules, into their own legal systems that also vary widely.
But when all is said and done, each country has a government and civil service that runs its own country, and if the EU faded away, most would continue to do so.
All that said, when the Euro was first proposed I thought it would make a lot of sense for countries to run their own currencies in parallel for a few years, even permanently, because of the problem of differing economic cycles and rules about deficits and interest rates. That was the issue with the collapse of Greece - it was able to borrow huge sums at low interest rates as an EU and Euro member, when its economy should have had high interest rates to curb borrowing. Those stresses still remain, with few countries wanting the economic straitjacket of common economic policies.
I am in France because are the most basic level, this region of France can probably function as an economically viable region even if the EU disintegrated, and even if the French government collapsed. It has always produced surpluses of food and was wealthy in medieval times (always a good indicator). It has local hydro electricity. It has good sea trading links, good rainfall, mild climate, low risk of heatwaves, and so much more that makes it more resilient than almost anywhere else I can think of.
I am unconcerned about Germany's problems, not least because the shift of companies and the shift in political power to France is good for France! I'm not that concerned in the short term about Ukraine - if Trump forces a peace on current boundaries, that war will stop. It will be years before Putin would try to go further.
My main concerns are the accelerating climate crises in relation to where I live now, the possibility of a new pandemic, and the imminent financial crash, probably triggered by Trump's presidency. That's enough to worry about for the moment.
Goodluck with migration of billions of agriculatural migrants to the lucky latitudes then!
You are an idiot. Climate crisis, new pandemic... What can one say other than laugh about how much of a cretin you must be to be concerned about a fakery like climate change and still believe anything about the plan-demic stories. I thought even cretins won't buy the story of two pandemics less than a decade apart but the level of gullibility and stupidity some of you have is astonishing.
Please avoid this language
Fuck off!
Please avoid this language
a little question ugo when do you think europe would collapse you say before the usa but then you say by 2030 we would go from 27 member states to 35 member states this does not make many sense and what does agenda 2030 mean why 2030 the same deadline as earth4all to create a planet for all ?
Yes another fake pandemic would be pushing it Joe Doe but only a cretin would believe the climate crrisis denials deliberately circulated on social media by legacy industries.
You might be right in your conclusions regarding collapse in US and EU taking very different forms as indeed both political structures are quite different. US being more integrated they might be stronger but also collapse with a bigger crash.
But I believe you're also harbouring some misconceptions along the way.
The economy in Germany is not collapsing because Germans didn't invested enough in renewables. But because their whole wacky renewable plan could only works with a lot of cheap natgaz they don't have anymore. Ten years recovery is a minimum. Given the overall situation, it could well be terminal.
And the French economy is everything but industrially self-sufficient. This is old story from the 60s maybe. It's now decades that the mantra states that France will be much better off without industry. And now France is even loosing fast its age-old agricultural self-sufficiency. And it is not a few start-up pet projects that will make the difference. Nuclear energy is the only real (short term) advantage left. To the point that the Germans are doing all they can at the European level to offset it...
I disagree about France and industry, at two levels; at the local level this small village is close to three large industrial estates, a major port for ferries, raw material imports and fishing exports, and a thriving city, all connected to the TGV high speed rail system and autoroutes. It is a thriving manufacturing, farming, food production and export area, and has considerable resilience because of that.
On the bigger level, French industry benefits from relatively cheap electricity from nuclear and hydro, so for example, can produce aluminium almost as cheaply as steel. Industrial energy prices are a key part of production costs and it is a major advantage over Germany, Britain, Spain, Italy, and many others.
But hey, you choose what you want to believe.
True. Industry haven't disappeared totally and some area might still look prosperous.
Still industry went from 30% of the GPD in the 60s (for all that GPD is worth) to stagnating between 20 and 15% for something like 20 years now. Agricultural GPD crashed even more while commercial sector (that is selling stuff that is mostly not produced in France and purchased on credit) soared to 70%.
It is a complicated story. It is true that the common market and the single monetary system was a big benefit for member states. They may not be so strictly integrated with the European system as the US states are with the federal system. But it is to be seen how they'll fare once they are on their own. It is a law of markets that big fish eat small fish.
I have no idea where you are finding your numbers, but they do not resemble anything I have ever seen from government or mainstream sources.
You are also missing my point, but that's ok, you are on your own path, and unlikely to change your beliefs. Let's leave it there.
As you want.
But it is a well known trend and fully confirmed by statics you can easily find on internet :
https://fr.statista.com/statistiques/1047192/distribution-de-produit-brut-pib-dans-secteurs-economiques-en-france/
And as I said, I agree with your general conclusion. Just maybe not by the way you reach it ;)
The German economy is not falling because of a 'wacky renewable plan' with or without Russia Gas, that is a con https://jowaller.substack.com/publish/post/140884440
It's pretty much the same.
Germans knew their industrial economy couldn't rely on renewable energy alone. Whatever they could do regarding that. Local climate and industrial physics just doesn't add up.
But in the same time, their American suzerain repeatedly warned them that it would not tolerate their strategical emancipation by importing cheap Russian natgaz.
And still these fools did it. They though that the US didn't really have the means or will to stop them anymore. And they were wrong. The US had the Ukrainian card in their sleeve all along...
The problem wasn't that Germany was reliant on affordable Russia gas, it was that the US blew up the NS2 and deliberately enticed German industry to the States and paid Baerbock and Sholtz to trash nuclear- all because they'd rather see Germany and thus the EU destroyed than flourish by trading with Russia.
Oh right. One of those.
Oh right. One of them.
I looked at your reposts. You think everything is a conspiracy. That leads you down the rabbit hole until you can't believe anything and your foundations crumble away. It is a path to loneliness and craziness in the real world.
I disagree with you - generally I have found the simplest answer is the right answer unless there is actual evidence (not opinions or internet theories) to the contrary. Generally people make mistakes, have background mundane reasons for decisions we haven't considered, and groups of people talk themselves into decisions for the wrong reasons. Often people in positions of power aren't very bright.
None of that means conspiracies are everywhere.
While you make some interesting observations about individual member states' resilience, I think you're underestimating how deeply EU integration has transformed national sovereignty. The "beneficial laws" you mention aren't simply individual policies that can be cherry-picked post-dissolution - they're part of an interconnected system that has fundamentally altered how European nations function.
Take monetary policy, for example. Eurozone countries have surrendered their ability to manage their own currency and interest rates. This isn't just a "beneficial law" that can be casually maintained - it's a fundamental surrender of national economic sovereignty that has created deep structural dependencies. The same applies to trade relationships, which are now entirely mediated through EU structures.
Your comparison with the US federal system actually supports this point, though not in the way you intended. The EU has gradually created similar dependencies, but without the democratic legitimacy or constitutional framework that undergirds the American system. European nations haven't just adopted helpful standards - they've been systematically integrated into a supranational structure that is increasingly difficult to disentangle.
Germany's current energy crisis, which you correctly identify, illustrates this perfectly. Its predicament isn't just about domestic policy choices - it's about how EU-level decisions on energy policy, emissions trading, and Russian sanctions have constrained national sovereignty and limited member states' ability to pursue independent solutions.
This suggests that any "collapse" would be far more consequential than a simple reversion to pre-EU arrangements. The challenge isn't just maintaining "beneficial" regulations - it's about reconstructing national sovereignty in a context where it has been systematically dismantled.
One obvious symptom of the "souverainism" you mention is the growing number of individual countries reimposing border controls to cope with the migrant problem. One by one they are giving up on the Schengen zone idea because the center is failing to cope with the issue.
I don't even think that the center is failing to cope with the issue. It has always been much more of a project than an issue...
You're quite right, I was trying to be generous in my wording. I'd say another symptom of what Ugo is talking about is the increasing failure of our legal system. In the case of immigration, laws the authorities don't like are ignored rather than changed. For example: In the US, ignoring immigration law is becoming a widespread phenomenon. There is insufficient popular support for unlimited immigration, so while saying we need "common sense" immigration reform, authorities simply admit Illegals rather than turning them back, and many political jurisdictions have declared themselves "sanctuaries" despite its illegality.
It's the same in Europe. There are laws which are just intentionally emptied of their content.
For exemple, as in any other country, foreigners are not supposed to stay in Europe without a valid visa. But, thanks to some EU regulation, doing so is not an offense anymore. So people are somehow allowed to stay in some organized legal limbo nobody understand exactly what is means...
I'm afraid European political elites don't even have the mindset to change course. And more to the point to try to improve relations with their main potential supplier of energy and raw ressources they uselessly turned a bitter enemy at their very own door.
They are far too convinced of the intrinsic superiority of the European liberal model to do so. They are now so disconnected from their historical origins and values they can't even imagine that some populations (be there from Crimea, Donbass or Georgia but also from any European countries) will refuse to join their wonderful post-national European Utopia and would rather favour their own historical origins and cultural connections. They are just backward far-right stupid people who just deserve to be educated, bullied, silenced or replaced.
Of course, I might be proved wrong.
But I do believe they would rather maintain any failed economic sanctions for the sake of them. Even at the cost of the whole Western Europe economy. And, being Good facing Evil, they will destroy by any means available any political opponent that might object.
And, of course, they have a Plan B. Like any aristocrats of the past, they have the conviction that their superior moral values, their money and their worldwide connections will allow them to leave the place if things really goes belly-up. So why bother with Tainter's law ?...
even gaya herrington stated on the channel from sera tajima that the next 5 years will determine or welbeing for the rest of the century she even stated we have 5 years to turn things around like many club of rome members said before me
Fuck the club of rome and their lies and disguised satanism. And fuck all the fools still believing their bullshit. There is a booster you haven't taken recently. Don't forget to be fully "vaccinated" for the coming influence season. The club of rome will appreciate that.
I feel like there will be no "end" to EU, China or USA, Russia is still there almost immutable as when was the foundation of URSS. What is keeping these institutions is the lack of alternative systems that work equally or better, we have a lot of competing memetic systems around still the Cold War core is still the most viable to the majority of his populace: we track migration as indicator because people tend to move from a memetic system to one that is "better" so we know that our imperfect living place is still better compared to alternative.
Our is a failing system, but personally feel like our "saviors" like Trump and others are a perfect product of the same defects that we want to correct, they are grown in a resource rich environment made by a society that they never had to take part to (no labor class experience) so they are thinking and analyzing as the nobles of the royal court of Louis XVI. We see a coordinated filing of both the liberal solutions like Argentine and planned economy like China, the answer proposed in MAGA that is a supposed time machine to "bring back good Old Days" but with our new improved "good guys", people grown in the financial paradise blessed by great social skills and hyper communicative....
We could dry all swamps and take off bureaucracy, freeing people from taxes and regulations, and go straight to paradise states like banana republics, could free people to drill any patch of fossil viable (but we are just doing it now) and hope that we could go back to the 50's cheap oil and understand that fossil is not eternal and so on. Maybe that we must understand that the "swamp" is also the enforcing of environmental, work safety and public health regulations, some of the biggest danger to business.
EU was the last try for a region that had burned up ALL is resources during TWO WW, Europe had used up all so now is trying to survive on what have that is a potential for renewable and a lot of social stability. They are failing in this but is not a defect of purpose, we are in the first globalized, coordinated bubble burst of anything, globalization have coordinated all the world synchronizing the economic cycles so also the burst ones so today no economy is in boom when other are in burst!
As indicator of global meltdown we could use the fertility rates, they are falling trought the world without any exception, this could be linked to a recessionary force that is universal because based on the law of diminishing returns: recession coul be described as poor acces to expendable free salary that is also what children are feed from...
'It's one of the laws of the universe' - and it doesnt apply to the universe, an extrmely complex organism ?
An excellent analysis that highlights the inherent contradictions of the EU project. Your parallel between bureaucratic complexity and energy costs is particularly insightful, as it demonstrates how the EU's pursuit of "ever closer union" actually undermines its sustainability.
While you focus on translation as a concrete example of escalating complexity, there's another critical aspect worth considering: the increasing difficulty of maintaining democratic legitimacy across an expanding union. Each new layer of bureaucracy and each additional member state further distances decision-making from national parliaments and citizens, creating not just administrative inefficiency but a fundamental crisis of democratic accountability.
Your comparison with imperial structures is especially relevant here. The EU seems caught in an impossible position - unable to function efficiently as a confederation of equal states, yet politically incapable of transforming into a hierarchical empire. This may explain why we're seeing increasing support for national sovereignty movements across member states - citizens instinctively understand that their democratic voice becomes increasingly diluted with each expansion of EU authority.
What's so sad about this warning is that the logic is so compelling. I was greatly impressed with Tainter's book, The Collapse of Complex Societiess, and his treatment of Average versus Marginal returns. Bravo, Sig. Bardi!
BINGO!
"EU mirrors both the USSR and the US. It is a huge bureaucratic organization ruled by an incompetent elite whose main purpose is to enrich various corporate sharks, inside and outside Europe. In addition, it has specific problems. The EU has little or no internal mineral resources; it mostly relies on imports. Since it has no army of its own, the depletion problem is unsolvable by the same methods that allowed the US and the URSS to survive a little more: increasing internal production, and use military means to control or intimidate foreign producers. So, it is likely that the next large state organization to follow the USSR down the Seneca Cliff will not be the US, but the EU."
dr nafeez ahmed said that the usa would collapse if they stay on fossil fuels and deport 20 million imigrants from the food and textail sector between 20 januari 2025 and 2028 they would lose 25 % of gdp ?
Sure it will. The best course of action is to allow unlimited immigration so the gdp can grow forever...
read age of transformation dr nafeez ahmed blog you will see !
Read the cdc approval documents for the covid "vaccines" and you'll see. Have you taken all the recommended boosters? If not, why not?
yes I take every year a booster vaccine
Every year? Are you an anti vaxxer??? You should take them every couple of months or so. And what about the covid boosters? Four or five per year as per cdc reccomandation. If you don't have at least 12 covid shots in you by now, you truly are nothing more than a science denier, anti vaxxer, putinist.
An interesting mathematical based theorem. I believe the physics of complexity theory would also apply. I am a "researcher" of culture and philosophy of ideas. I think that we can see this happen in all nation states throughout history although I do not have as much knowledge or expertise in eastern culture; however, I can see from the states of China and India, Who have older nation states perhaps than Mesopotamian, Greek, Roman and Egyptian ones, that decline and entropy resulting in bureaucracy are the patterns. I was struck in your post post by your initial description because it sounded a lot like the late Roman Republic which is why of course the Roman proletariat types, "the people," welcomed Caesar as dictator, but in this case, the bourgeoise killed him to "save the Republic" instead of kissing the ring initiating Civil War and prolonging the entry into the stage military dictatorship, which frankly, is a main driver, for the reason why Christianity went viral when it did: impoverished poor in a war torn nation whose fate depended on power grabbing oligarchs were without hope.
People compare Trump to J Caesar but he does not compare on any level, though because of his ego-inflation, like Napoleon, he probably sees himself that way and because his followers have a cult-like adoration of him, they referred to him in that light.
In my opinion, the Liberal Left/Conservative Right idealism conflict, with it archetypal and team sports model, is providing an excellent smoke screen for the purchase of the entire earth by wealthy elite oligarchs, essentially white collar crime. I think that it is obvious that because we are so busy looking at their puppet shows and war games.
if earth4all say we have until 2030 we have until 2030 otherwise the club of rome would not have published the book carlos alvarez pereira even said read the book
I think in 2030 there will by 36 member states ?