The adventure of a united Europe started in 1958 with the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) European Economic Community (EEC) created by 6 countries. More countries joined and in the 1993 Treaty of Maastricht the name European Union (EU) came to be. The most recent amendment to the constitutional basis was done in 2009 in the Treaty of Lisbon.
Pretty are the intentions, but how realistic is their success? Originally Europe united to avoid future wars and for economical reasons, maybe to face the powerful economy of the USA. Nevertheless, looking at it from the inside today, it seems to be about to unravel.
The EU has an extension of 1,669,807 sq m. It includes 27 countries. There are 23 official languages spoken, and 150 minority and regional languages. The main churches are the Catholic, the Orthodox, the Protestant (Lutheran, Calvinist, Anglican) and Islam. It goes without saying how dramatic cultural, social and economical differences are inside the frontiers of the EU. How is it possible to unify the interests of such a heterogeneous group?
Finland is one of the EU's most healthy economies. But its people are dissatisfied with the demands the EU is putting on economically healthy countries to guarantee the loans of economically critical countries like Greece is, or Ireland, Italy and Spain. The regular Finn does not understand why he should pay with his work the incompetence and irresponsibility of the Greek; a most humane reaction. A regular Finn is hard working, honest and earnest. He pays his taxes without complaints, doesn´t cheat and does not avoid his duty. Year after year the Finn works with the determination of an ant, maybe because after thousands of years living in extreme climatological conditions, in his genes is coded the urgency of collecting food for the long winter. The normal Finn sees the normal Greek as a lazy, dishonest individual who spends his days carefree under the generous and abundant sun that shines over the Hellenic Peninsula; why should such behaviour be awarded? It is the story of the ant and the grasshopper. And let's not forget the collective mind acts pretty much moved by generalisations.
Politicians -oh, so in love with their EU! - do not seem to acknowledge this vital human factor. It is praiseworthy that governments strive to create union, peace and wealth beyond frontiers, but blaming the people, who do not want to save from the pit those Europeans who did not fulfil their duties adequately, is not psychologically too smart and it creates anger.
Finland is divided into two camps: the camp of those who want to be cosmopolitan and European, and that are ready to satisfy the demands of the Big Shots in the EU; and the camp of those who feel unjustly used and abused and do not want to take responsibility of the debts of the prodigal sons. Finland, with its young Western civilization (history starts in c. 1100 A.D. with the Swedish invasions) suffers from an inferiority complex when facing Old Europe, and Finnish cultivated and cosmopolitan sectors want above all to be accepted by Old Europe, no matter how high the price. But, the majority of the population, obviously (regular humans as they are), thinks about the interest of its own tribe, and only reluctantly hands over its provisions to what they see as lazy foreigners. The majority does not see the evolution of economy in the long term, and has a hard time understanding how something so far away can affect its own everyday life here in the North. Information is very obscure and the political jargon uncomprenhensible.
Certainly we must all make sacrifices for the general and supranational good, but politicians should take in serious consideration the psyche of the heterogeneous populace of the EU when making and exposing their politics. One cannot force things without damage. One should definitely not be too theoretical when making big political and economical decisions. And one should inform openly and educate the people in order to have the most beneficial decisions come true without anger and bad feelings.