For European economic growth, cultural sector has opened a new window by creating job opportunities. Thus, the European Agenda for culture has been created through the United Nations Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions with a vision 2020 for Europe applying the strategic mechanisms for the growth of job opportunities through international agreements. These strategic mechanisms include the principle of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms; the principle of sovereignty; the principle of the equal dignity of and respect for all culture; the principle of international solidarity and cooperation; principle of the complementarity of economic and cultural aspects of development; and the principle of openness and balance. Each and every EU Member State is responsible for its own cultural sector policies. In this regard, the European Commission is raising its hand to overcome the common challenges like changing models of cultural governance, and the member states for creating innovative cultural and creative sectors.
Today there is a debate of whether or not the EU is worth it. The EU nations are benefitted more than they are the cost because it makes the nations more economically competitive or successful, it provides peace and security for nations in the union, and creates diversity between countries and makes countries more tolerant of other nations. Although it can be stated that countries are experiencing a loss of culture due to the EU, the benefits of diversity and tolerant countries outweigh that possibility. The EU creates a population that is diverse and culturally tolerant, because members allow people from member nations to move freely across borders, and openly accepts migrants from countries across the world. The European Union creates peace and security by preventing a series of ongoing wars between members and
While Europe was trying to control and conquer Africa, Africa was really suffering and in hell because of Europe. In conclusion Europe and Africa both suffered from these events. These are nationalism, culture attitude, and economics. In the long run the race for Africa led to a war within Europe. Africa on this day still has European influences in their everyday lives.
European powers continued to claim overseas empires to exploit their resources for their own benefit. Following the Industrial Revolution in the mid-nineteenth century, Europe had advanced tremendously. Technological advances and the development of a capitalist economy called for support from overseas markets and resources. Jules Ferry claims that “imperialism involved the aggressive search for, and international conflict over territory or spheres of influence providing markets and outlets for investment”. The European powers were highly concerned with increasing their capital.
Such was as seen in 2004 when 15 states within the Europe continent joined in to form what is still is the largest expansion of European integration. However, this move was no sort critics when it was widely circulated that the expansion of free movements was meant to weaken the Eastern part of Europe that is largely underdeveloped. The rate of movement across Europe is today majorly on the basis of varied income and standards of living between the member
European identity The civic component being the acceptance of the same democratic values and care for human rights and ethno - cultural being a common cultural history. Many researches have been conducted until now; others following qualitative methods and other following quantitative. Authors of qualitative research support that quantitative data are not ideal to measure identity due to its abstract nature and This research paper will shed light on the issue of identification in European citizens since it recognizes its importance for the future of European Union. Erasmus Programme as a Policy Tool The Erasmus Programme is a policy tool of the European Union and specifically the European commission. It has served over the years many different purposes.
European Integration: The end of just the beginning? Integration, Fragmentation (INRL30050) Dr. Tobias Theiler 12th December 2014 Student Number: 11913321 Word Count (including bibliography): 2495 With reference to Neofunctionalism and intergovernmentalism, compare and contrast these two international relations theories in relation to further integration and unification of the European Union. There is much debate in contemporary society about the future of the European Union. The most recent 2014 election results to the European Parliament show an increase in the number of seats for many Eurosceptic parties. This is coupled with most recent Eurobarometer polls that show trust of the European Union is at an all-time low for
Western Europe became the home of many of the world’s major superpowers and began to dominate proceedings on the world stage. Western Europe entered an era of almost unmatched economic and technological supremacy, and started the colonial era, colonising vast unconquered portions of the globe. This essay will highlight the changes that occurred in the society of Europe between the early modern period and the modern period. This essay will show these changes by illustrating these changes in these individual countries. England England in the year 1500 was an
The internal factors alone, without the external ones, would like be insuffient for sucessful integration: too many countries had very different national interested, too many leaders opposed to the idea of integration to begin with. If external factors did not exist, the European integration, even it it happened, would have been much slowlier or maybe would have been as deep: it is “easier” to act and cooperate for the European states in the face of one common enemy (or two in this case). The same is true the other way around: with all the external factors in the world the European integration wouldn’t have been possible if it wasn’t for the internal interests, for the readiness of the countries to partially give up their sovereignity in order to confer certain powers to the Union, the readiness that had been fostered in Europe for centuries but which only gained a critical mass after the World War II, itself being an internal and external factor at the same time. History, as we know, has no “ifs” and “if not’s” but we can definitely conclude that it is the combination of the internal and external factors that influenced the European integration and shaped the European Union as we know it today. Bibliography: 1.
With the ultimate purpose of the European Union being to encourage greater political, economic and social harmony amongst the states of Western Europe , the promotion and endorsement of European Integration is paramount to the success of attaining this goal. Of late, the pertinent issue regarding European integration is the challenge posed by the integration of refugees into European society, and the effect the success – or lack of – that this has on the support fostered by the EU from its citizens. Arguably, the EU’s historical success in dealing with integration has often faltered. To varying extents, societies throughout the EU have been contending with the challenges posed by ever-growing diversity for decades. In recent years, debates