Kevin Magee on Mon, 31 Mar 2003 20:18:11 +0200 (CEST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
<nettime> Note from Afar |
The Ambassador from Greece addressed an audience of 75-100 students this morning at Tomsk Polytechnic University, reading from a prepared text in English for the better part of an hour. There was an impromptu aspect to the meeting, given the absence of ceremony. Among quotations from Jose Ortega y Gasset and Hugo von Hofmannsthal, a general European Union policy position, or disposition, was described which included references to the threat of ethnic nationalisms and internal security concerns with respect to terrorism in the post 9-11 world. "Meta-modern" and "postmodern" attributes accompanied the concept of the nation-state as that governing form which finds itself being redefined in the contemporary global economic space. Fragmented, Europe is fragmented, it was emphasized, despite the enormous achievement of monetary stabilization accomplished by the EURO which reflects an unprecedented level of coordination among the European nations and their recognition that mutually dependent economies, even when some nations benefit more than others, stand to gain more from regulated competition than from an unregulated market economy. The end of the paper turned to the question of culture and identified the cultural sphere as force for social transformation, reciting a list of oppositions or polarities belonging to European historical experience which ended (the list, not the history itself) in the opposition between capitalism and communism. This last word was spoken very softly, or reluctantly, enunciated from within the perceptual frame of asserting a common culture and history. The prospect of a United States of Europe is far off, it was said, an idea that the European union was not yet ready for, but an idea as well which must be thought. (Doesn't Bronstein use this phrase in the pamphlet, "Europe and America"?) Que veut le capitale Americain, etc. But that was another war, after or before. A student asked the question, Are you saying that it is the fragmentation of Europe and the lack of a common foreign policy which contributed to the USA's invasion of Iraq? I didn't mention the United States anywhere in this paper, he said, diplomatically. In his response, though, the Marshall Plan was remembered as the rebuilding of Europe necessary for the U.S. as a market for their exports. Mention was also made to the competition between France and Germany, then, now? It wasn't clear. What was clear, to this author, was the statement of need for a united capability for defending mutually dependent economies and their shared cultural histories. To draw any broader conclusions would be more subjective than this brief paraphrase is willing to commit. another of nettime's reporters at large http://hypobololemaioi.com -- # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: majordomo@bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net