Europe is far from coherent, even if it is the most coherent that ever has been.

Meanwhile, support rate for EU and Eurozone is highest ever among EU member states and Europe as a whole. If anything, people are annoyed that EU struggles to be decisive as Europeans want more EU, not less. This new situation even paved the way for collaboration previously thought to be far fetched dream.

I don't know how all this will unfold but if tonight Europe ends as we know it, tomorrow we will have European federation and the discussions won't be about the petty local issues but thinks like EU army etc. as all Europeans are very annoyed by Russia, USA and the current state of affairs in Europe.

Check the stats, Europeans don't buy into the agenda pushed by the American libertarians. People want bigger stronger EU to take over where USA abandoned.

>"End of Europe" as a coherent entity that's willing and able to look after its own interests.

Europe doesn't have coherent interests across the board but every country acts purely in its own interest even if it's at the expense of the other member states. EU is an org that replaced the battlefield so Europeans don't have another world war with each other but instead backstab themselves tough politics in the EU parlaiment.

See the illegal immigration issue that still hasn't been solved since 2015 and instead of solving it, they just ban anti-illegal-immigration right wing candidates or parties from being allowed to take part in elections and pretend the issue went away.

>Imagine if it was 1942 and Britain was still shipping millions of dollars of weapons components into Germany via Sweden or Switzerland?

1) Britain was at war directly with Germany in 1942, but Germany is not fighting Russia, Ukraine is, as the proxy, so German corporations can afford to profit form this war as the government looks away. Big difference. There's Realpolitik and then there's idealistic fantasy.

2) Britain could afford to declare war on Germany because Germany didn't have nukes, while now Russia has nukes and Germany doesn't. Even "better", Germany made its economy dependent on Russian gas. Britain didn't have its economy dependent on resources imported from Germany. Huge differences that make such comparisons not even in the same ballpark.

The sole reason Germany annexed Czechoslovakia was was that there were atrocities being committed against the Sudeten[0].

He even made a speech at the Sportpalast in Berlin in which he stated that the Sudetenland was "the last territorial demand I have to make in Europe". So all's fine, and we don't have to worry about Germany.

0: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lesson_of_Munich

It also made "no sense" for Russia to attack Ukraine. This is not about rational thinking.

> The sole reason Russia invaded Ukraine was that it was flirting too much with NATO.

I don't understand, are you trying to make Russia sound like an incel? It's not a flattering look.

In addition to the other responses:

> The sole reason Russia invaded Ukraine was that it was flirting too much with NATO.

Which was only a problem for Putin because Putin's world view is that Great Powers (such as Russia, in his mind) should have a sphere of influence, whereas most everyone else thinks Ukraine is a sovereign nation who has the right to decide for itself which treaties it does or doesn't belong to.

Even then, more like begging than flirting; the invasion made it much more likely. Likewise EU membership.

.. which has had the effect of forcing formerly neutral Finland, which shares a border with Russia, to join NATO.

The claim that Russia has a right to dictate the alliances of other countries simply because they border it is ludicrous and violates international law.

(Simo Häyhä had something to say about last time Russia invaded Finland)

Putin (et al.) has already proven to be stupid : the invasion of Ukraine was going quite well for him since 2014, he could have continued salami slicing it while the EU was still mostly asleep (and not willing to make a fuss as a Russian hydrocarbons importer).

But no, he went for a 'quick' victory instead, and ended up bogged in a much higher intensity war, made the Russian military a laughing stock, and kicked the EU/Nato bees nest so hard that another 2 countries immediately joined NATO.

So PSOE, the ones with a rose in their logo aren't left enough for you? They have a coalition with some parties that are quite a bit further left too.

>Is there an EU state government where a left-wing party has the majority? I can't think of one,

A single party? No. But a coalition to form a leftist majority, yes.

> run by the far-right (e.g. Italy, Hungary, Slovakia, the Netherlands),

Since the far right PVV stepped out of the Dutch governing coalition, they should now be placed with the centrists/conservatives.

These are the facts:

Australian social security budget: about $120 billion

Australian NDIS budget: about $52 billion

Number of working Australians: 14.6 million

Number of welfare recipients in Australia: about 5.4 million, or about the entire population of Melbourne.

Number of NDIS recipients in Australia: about 661,000

That’s about $78,500 per NDIS recipient.

Democracy can last only up to that point the majority realise they can vote themselves largess from the public purse.

I have co-worker like this, he had minimal insurance, until he crashed his car and lost like 15k, doesn't need insurance for his cat until 2k vet bill, doesn't need doctors, until he gets sick..

You think he would learn at some point, but no.

[flagged]

I guess that is what tax is for