Top products from r/europe

We found 51 product mentions on r/europe. We ranked the 643 resulting products by number of redditors who mentioned them. Here are the top 20.

Next page

Top comments that mention products on r/europe:

u/frequentlywrong · 10 pointsr/europe

> its pretty universally acknowledged that free trade is a good thing.

Funny how no one ever asks "good for who and good for what?". Good for prices and good for international corporations bottom line sure. Easy to make that economic model. Unfortunately we don't live in mathematical economic models, we live in the real world.

Most would consider it better to have:

  • Domestic employment, not third world pollute all you want, barely above slave labor.

  • Domestic successful companies, not international corporations who only take money out of the local economy.

    > I would argue that protectionism in that time didn't help economic conditions at all.

    If you actually care about this topic I suggest:

u/[deleted] · 6 pointsr/europe

More to tell? Um...In my experience, British people won't automatically be dicks to Americans (or anyone, really). But there's definitely a period I've had with my British acquaintances where they were clearly reserving judgement until they've determined whether or not I was a walking stereotype. At one point I won someone's respect but picking up on sarcasm and responding in kind.

Watching the English was something I read not long after getting serious with my partner. It helped put many cultural differences in context, especially class-related stuff. It's not that Americans don't have a class system, but rules signalling class is primarily based on income, where in the UK it has much more to do with education and social mores.

Romanians are generally pretty cool with Americans and Brits, in my year of experience. However, there are some class differences - people who are reasonably well educated and young have zero problems with Brits/Americans, where as older, working class people tend to be harder to win over (but they're rarely openly antagonistic or resentful). Not being a dick (e.g. not treating taxi drivers or store clerks like robots) and learning some Romanian goes a long way.

u/Peter_J_Quill · 9 pointsr/europe

> Right-wing nutjobs (fascists)

Not even remotely the same, fascism originated from the Italian left and got great under Mussolini, whose party was hugely supported by Italian Jews.

Well, until he thought of Hitler as a serious threat and tried to get cozy with him.

Experts like Roger Griffin, Robert Paxton and many more generally agree that fascism is neither "Left" nor "Right" exclusive.

Edit: I just realized the glorious irony in your comment.

u/ArtHistoryBrussels · 6 pointsr/europe

I have to thread lightly here, because i'm not an expert, but i'll try to answer:

First of all, you have to see him in his own context and try not to judge by current (modern) standards. Every Western country was taking part in the Scramble for Africa, and it's not that hard to imagine that none of the participants had the wellbeing of the native population as their prime concern.

Secondly: Yes, there was wide spread abuse, atrocities, killings,... Yes, as the founder and sole owner of Congo Free State, he is/was without any doubt partly responsible. Yes, economic gain was the first goal, human rights were often not even considered. BUT: was it genocide... (and here is the controversial bit): in my humble opinion: no. Was it mismanagment and grave negligence and whatever: perhaps. But as always with history, it isn't simply a black and white story, there is always lots of nuance.

Like i said: i'm no specialist. A very interesting read about Congo (and the role, both good and bad, Leopold played) is this book.

u/watrenu · 5 pointsr/europe

>Even before (and it'd have to be true, right?) July 4, 1776, there was a distinctly 'American' flavor of the Anglo-Saxon identity that existed among the otherwise 'British' people who colonized the area and took swathes of it away from competing Dutch and French claims on the aboriginal people's territories.

true, Albion's Seed is a particularly interesting book on the English roots of some aspects of American culture

> some flavoring from the 18th, 19th, and 21st century additions of Europe and Latin America.

as well as Africa, an oft ignored source of many modern American traditions

>How valid do you think a "Macedonian" identity is?

a popular conspiracy theory (may even be true in some part, not sure) is that Tito created it

u/ocnarfsemaj · 1 pointr/europe

Lol. Ok. Good luck with that. Might actually work on people who know nothing about stats. Edit: Further reading for you

u/Catnip123 · 1 pointr/europe

On a related note, I read (I think it was in Christopher Browning's "Ordinary Men" ) how the Nazi soldiers reacted when first encountering those Jewish communities during their invasion of Poland.
Like, those Polish Jews actually looked exactly like those caricatures which the propaganda had fed them for years, while German Jews mostly looked and dressed like regular Germans.
Many soldiers were flabbergasted that those people actually existed- and believed that this means that probably everything else the propaganda had told them about the Jews had to be true just as well.
It was then that their leadership was seriously developing plans that lead to the genocide a.k.a. "Endlösung"

u/ProblemY · 1 pointr/europe

> The most prosperous period for the west was post-Reagan, though.

Prosperous in what way? Because definitely not for working people

> It is an argument, because without visible examples, we do not have a clear picture of the better alternative, or how to get there. We only have theories, and these theories aren't exactly solid.

No it is not an argument, because saying "it's better than in some desert, war-ravaged post-colonial country" is not honest. Also, Ha-Joon Chang in his book is pretty clear that economic miracles are often result of government interventionism.

> Other countries are only catching up economically. They're not catching up when it comes to civil rights, worker rights or the welfare state.

It's all about trends. It is getting better there, while it's getting worse here in many areas.

> Meanwhile, our countries have to compete with their countries in a global economy

No we don't. We chose to open the markets, often even forced them to because it benefits owners of the production means as they can move freely to country with cheaper labor. It was a political decision, not inevitability.

> Are you going to want an instant big economic paradigm shift every time income graphs dip down a little?

A little? Once again I can only refer you to literature that shows the magnitude of disempowerment that working people have experienced in recent decades. And no, we don't need a paradigm shift, but EU is not tackling any problems. No, they don't fight with tax havens, capital flight, they want to engage in more free trade deals.

> The times have changed, technology is omnipresent, and not every small town can have a factory in its backyard that will guarantee consistent employment for 2000-3000 people. Of course things are going to be worse than they used to be in recently de-industrialized areas.

Again, de-industrialization is a political choice more often than not and we are not living in some golden age of technology. If you wish to know more I suggest you Ha-Joon Chang's book who shows how telegraph was much more ground-breaking than invention of Internet whose influence on productivity is quite vague and rather unprovable.

> And that's not even considering the fact that in the current political environment, voting for those who propose big changes is almost a 100% certain vote to make things worse, and especially make things worse for the working class.

Change is always costly, that's why it would be preferable to go slowly, but people currently in charge refuse to do anything so we will get a revolution.

u/Daleborr · 5 pointsr/europe

Friedman has always had a boner for Japan for some reason.

Russia will become irrelevant, it's time is over as a global power.

Population is important, but geography is the name of the game. He does make some unorthodox prediction through the book, but I think he was completely right with Russia. It was pretty obvious if you were looking for it.

u/sektabox · 13 pointsr/europe

Only as far as it takes to take the WHOLE truth, not just the parts Israel agrees:

Salomon Morel

Chaim Rumkowski

And then I recommend "Eichmann in Jerusalem" by Hannah Arendt.

u/Bororum · 3 pointsr/europe

Most of the people there were still in the Iron Age. This is a amazing book on the subject, filled with first-hand accounts. The writer made it his life's work, going to villages all over Congo to gather first-hand accounts of what happened, and how the Congolese perceived it all.

u/dmt477 · 1 pointr/europe

> What Europeans dont realize yet is that this is dangerous because with democratic institutions demographics matter a lot. Different religious and ethnic groups do have different values to some degree and I think a lot of Europeans don't recognize that. Most know that if you imported 500k rural Poles to your city they'll start to vote for banning abortion, but for some reason people are afraid to extrapolate that to other groups such as say North Africans. They prefer to live a fantasy where you will 'enlighten' these groups to give up previous in-group values en masse and integrate but if their demographics don't pressure it because they are a plurality or even a majority they will have more in-group pressure to retain than out-group pressure to change.

We don't realise it because we never really experienced true multiculturalism before, and many are still in denial about its effect. Now that demographics are rapidly changing, my point of view is Europe is going to start experiencing something similar to the 60s-70s in USA where there were massive civil rights protest movements. Tough with major differences due to the ethnic populations being different than what the US experienced (no hispanics, mostly Arabs/Muslims in France for instance).

USA being pretty much the blueprint for a nation becoming multicultural. We will see this play out in Europe over the next decades. Here is an interesting bestseller fiction book for what might happen to France over the next years:

u/veringer · 0 pointsr/europe

> Scotland wasn't "part of the British Empire" it was the British Empire along with England

You're drawing a line at an arbitrary historical point. Go back far enough and there were very different cultures with different languages. A lot of blood was shed to get to a point of "was the British Empire" and there are still cultural reverberations apparent to this day. Some argue that the differences are even more pronounced in America where the settlement waves (over the course of a couple hundred years) were grouped along these very old cultural boundaries.

u/Ai795 · 2 pointsr/europe

It was made by British artist Gordon de la Mothe and was first published in London in this book 25 years ago:

u/ObdurateSloth · 7 pointsr/europe

Not from my country, but relevant to this sub - Postwar by Tony Judt.

u/Inclol · 7 pointsr/europe

What you're thinking of is probably Fukuyamas second thesis of the 'last man';

u/Rhabarberbarbara · 1 pointr/europe

Browning's Ordinary Men. We read that in school.

> For example some german policemen in Hamburg were sure jews need tools and other things with them as they were supposed to bulid houses for themselves there.

They were of course supposed to round them up and shoot them.

u/faaaaaaaaaart · 6 pointsr/europe

I'm currently reading When Titans Clashed: How the Red Army Stopped Hitler, by David Glantz.

It is based mostly on Soviet archives which opened to the West after the Iron Curtain fell. It is quite interesting, but can be incredibly dry at times. Lots of "General Sosoandsovski's Xth Rifle Division attacked General von Soandsohoffen's Xth Panzer Corps near Bumfuckėžys, Lithuania, supported by..." for pages and pages and pages.

u/9A4172 · 2 pointsr/europe

My understanding is that there is consensus on the USSR's motives for invading Poland, which was to by time for the inevitable war with Germany.

I've been reading this recently, and the author sure interprets the things that way.

u/SlyRatchet · 5 pointsr/europe


What the actual fuck? How does a passport cover (even a very nice one) end up costing that much?

Even the British one costs 30 quid

and on it's €40.

u/_superleo · 1 pointr/europe

Yeah, apparently it's used in this book.

You can buy it for 1 cent at Amazon.

Wouldn't recommend it, though.

I've heard there are shitty pics in it...

u/Drebutis · 6 pointsr/europe

The only sources I can find that give in-depth look of Lithuanian history are actually in Lithuanian language. Besides Lithuanian history is too complicated to begin with. I think you will have to do most of your research by yourself, though I can give some small facts.

You could also check out lituanus (Lituanus is an English language journal dedicated to Lithuanian and Baltic art, history, language, literature and related cultural topics) site.

Lithuania only had one King - Mindaugas that was baptised by Livonian monks after Battle of Saule, which made Livonian Order weak, but we needed a way to deal with invading Teutonic Order in Western Lithuania, at that time Kingdom of Poland was still an enemy state of Kingdom of Lithuania because they're the ones that invited Order to deal with Pagan old Prussians (Balts) that were raiding their Christian land. Mindaugas soon converted back to paganism after TO haven't stopped their attacks and especially due to him dying without heir, Kingdom of Lithuanian was once again Grand Duchy of Lithuania, even though most future Grand Dukes of Lithuania would call themselves as Kings of Lithuania, Ruthenia and Samogitia when writing to Pope... Also Lithuania and especially Samogitia are last regions to be baptised. That's just small part I can give, it would take forever to write everything that started to snowball from it.


>any good media to watch

You could watch simplified version of medieval Lithuania's border changes like this one (sadly it's in Lithuanian language), this one is a bit more in-depth on border changes.

There is video of why Battle of Grunwald/Žalgiris/Tannenberg (1410) was very important battle for Polish, Lithuanian and Teutonic Order's (soon to become Duchy of Prussia) history in region, that would determine which state will be on top. Also would suggest reading about Battle of Blue Waters (which finalized our conquest of ex-Kievan Rus'), Battle of Orsha (insane early XVI c. battle against Muscovy) and Battle of Kirchholm (yet another victory against all odds battle of early XVII c.), Lithuania has many battles from German Order to Mongols, to Swedes, to Russians, to Turks and so on.

There are even trailers to promote 600th anniversary of the battle:

I can also give you video of Lithuanian armed forces during Interwar period, fun fact we actually had more than enough of capability to stop advancing Soviet forces, though only until they would get re-enforcements.



There is podcast about Northern Crusades.


You can either read books that include some parts of our history.

Maybe start with wikipedia as it is easiest and shortest way to get glimpse of Lithuanian history:–Lithuanian_Commonwealth


u/TheElderGodsSmile · 4 pointsr/europe

Mate, you need to buy and read Eichmann in Jerusalem by Hannah Arendt and learn about the concept of the banality of evil.

Perfectly normal and sane human beings are quite capable of doing truly horrific things. In fact that makes them far more dangerous than lunatics because the truly insane by definition lack the power to be truly destructive.

u/EnjoyFotos · 3 pointsr/europe

I think that's a great argument for the rising importance and power of Poland. But his simultaneous argument that the EU is inevitably going to fail in the face of nationalism seems to gloss over the mammoth amount of thought every architect of the EU has given to exactly this problem. It's a huge obstacle to overcome, no doubt; but simply pointing to it doesn't make it insurmountable.

Let's just hope he's as wrong about this as he was when he predicted war between Japan and the US during the 90s.

u/sandr0 · 1 pointr/europe

Btw on your "facist point", which is basically you just yelling out the word FACIST, like a toddler that just learned it and thinks it sounds funny, but has no clue what it means.

Professor Stanley Payne (US, University of Wisconsin, author of "Fascism: Comparison and Definition"), Robert Paxton (US, University of Columbia), Kevin Passmore (UK, University of Cardiff), Matthew Feldman (UK, Teesside University) and Roger Griffin (UK, Oxford Brookes University, Autor of "The Nature of Fascism") disagree with you.

But I guess the guy yelling FACIST is more educated that the actual experts. Who needs experts, right? Fucking nerds just studied this crap their whole life, what the fuck do they know? Fuck them!

I mean, Trump "only" voids at least a couple of the GROUND principles of fascism, but whatever dude.

u/adevland · 0 pointsr/europe

> Why is pointing out the USA'S deficiencies at all relevant in this conversation? This is the definition of whataboutism.

The entire discussion is about one big promo stunt for a book written on the "what about the EU" rhetoric.

This is literally how it markets itself.

> The Strange Death of Europe is a highly personal account of a continent and culture caught in the act of suicide.

It fear-mongers immigration, while ignoring everything else.

It acts as if these are EU specific problems. They aren't.

You can actually argue that the EU could have done worse at dealing with immigration because, despite of this, the EU economy has beaten the US and it's only getting better. The article and book ignore this and falsely present the EU as being in bankruptcy.

The article paints the EU as the failing state that couldn't or wouldn't care about its people while it's exactly the opposite of this.

Why is this so? Because look at everybody else.

The US also has immigration problems as well as a different way of dealing with it. And the results are also different. The EU economy has beaten the US economy.

That's the point.

u/AceFlashheart · 1 pointr/europe

>There are no such attempts. Only naïve people and idiots can believe in such, or see such in Iraq War, lol. US and the West repeatedly tried and partially achieved transforming places into both countries where the Islamists, reactionaries and all kinds of distasteful bunch rule though, as well as distorting countries and of course through backing weird factions or using divisions, carving out both huge internal conflicts and extremists bunch out of those. Just like the Iraqi issue you have referred to, or the terrorists you've referred to. Of course same goes for Syria, but also the very core ideology of those terrorists have been spreading from, backed and financed from and originated from, you know, very one being supplied, backed and supported by the West.

You give them too much credit to believe that Iraq, or Syria was some sort of Machiavellian master plan.

No, the neo-cons really do believe their own garbage.

>They're openly conservative, and backing the American conservative attitude about the guns, while being full of conservatives, having organic ties with conservatives and the whole structure is about conservatives. You're trying a bit hard on that but anyway. Given the stance is coming from conservatives though, just like attackers being Muslims and conservatives, again, let's ban conservatism with your logic anyway.

Actually mass shooters in the USA tend to be either a) black thugs or b) nihilistic white/asian teenagers from liberal homes. I wouldn't say there's a "conservative" or "NRA" shooting problem, just a general lack of pragmatism on the issue of guns.

This is getting to be a pretty boring conversation. I'm not gonna admit that we need to ban "conservatism". Deluded as you are, even you must realize that the next mass murder or sexual assault in Europe ain't gonna be commuted by a "conservative".

If you've got nothing more to add then let's call it a day here.

u/SilenceOfTheShadow · 1 pointr/europe

>So what so terrible is on this events I dont know who is Mykolas Biržiška what he done. It was war time. Maybe he was suspected for espinage or maybe he were. Rest of activists ]were expelled. I know it wasnt glory but really shit storm for one man. As for repressions. Ok it wasnt good answer but you admit closing those schools wasnt good move either.

War was already over by year 1920. You're a sick person for defending execution, especially for just for espionage.

>It is intereesting. Give me more details here: dates, places, peoples, sources. Pact Molotov–Ribbentrop was signed 23 August 1939 war started few days later so there is no possible that it happened after pact.

From book The Baltic Transformed: Complexity Theory and European Security by Walter C. Clemens Jr., in page 6.

>Someone started topic here about joined parade of Nazi Germany and Communist Russia in occupy Polish city Brest. And you do what? Starting blaming Poland for actions like Putin made on Crimea. Wrong place wrong time. You could create own thread and I m sure there would be a place for discusion.

I just pointed out that Poles are too ready to defend their actions as long as it benefited Poland, not other states. It was okay for you to take over lands for ethnic reasons while ignoring the fact that half of pre-WW2 Poland was full of Ukrainians and Belarusians which Soviets took. Also pre-WW2 Poland several non-Polish territories (Klaipėda/Danzig), hell it once claimed whole of Lithuania not only by Pilsudski.

>Sorry If my answer were to spicy. I didnt know who I m talking cultural or none cultural person. Topic of victory Russian-German Brest parade is painfull.

That answer was not spicy, it was full of grammatical mistakes and out right insults. What it showed is that you're uncultured person.

>Of course there is Żeligowski mutiny in history in elementary school. It is even said that it was on secret orders of main commander marshall Piłsudski whose born in Vilnus region. It is also said that inhabitants of Vilnus wanted to be part of Poland. But I was on my mind here uprising made by "Vilnus Selfdefence" in New Yrears Eve 1918/1919.

So you finally see the similarities between Crimea and Vilnius, congrats. And it is not "said" it's a historical fact which Pilsudski admitted himself that he carried out that order.

> How it was possible that part of Lithuanians felt as a part of "Poland" and spoke polish(some of corse lithuanian)

>part felt as Lithuanians wanted to be in independant country and spoke Lithuanian language... What happen between 1863 and 1918 that you or part of you wanted to be separated state it is only 50 years? What happen?

Because XX c. was an era of rise of nationalism. Lithuanian National Revival

If you want to go deeper, I suggest reading this book.

u/adjarteapot · 0 pointsr/europe

> You give them too much credit to believe that Iraq, or Syria was some sort of Machiavellian master plan.

It wasn't, yet putting backing such lowlifes was planned, as well as backing KSA or supporting scum or using divisions was pretty much intentional.

> No, the neo-cons really do believe their own garbage.

Yes, I'm sure they also believed in mass destruction weapons. I'm sure many naïve bunch also believes in that they were spreading democracy, but I'm not sure how that's relevant. Both the real intention wasn't that, nor it cancels the responsibility. Let's not pretend that all have been done since the WWI or WWII was with some good intent.

> Actually mass shooters in the USA tend to be either a) black thugs or b) nihilistic white/asian teenagers from liberal homes. I wouldn't say there's a "conservative" or "NRA" shooting problem, just a general lack of pragmatism on the issue of guns.

There is a structural problem which many conservatives are the main cause with their stupid agenda. So, I can see American conservatism there.

> This is getting to be a pretty boring conversation. I'm not gonna admit that we need to ban "conservatism".

Why mate? If you can ban Muslims for some Muslims, I'm sure you can ban conservatives with the same logic. Actually, when it comes to mass bombings or mass murders, the folks did those were again conservatives of many kinds.

> Deluded as you are, even you must realize that the next mass murder or sexual assault in Europe ain't gonna be commuted by a "conservative".

Highly probably will, for the next murder. Rather by a Christian one or a Muslim one. Sexual assaults, not sure but sure that both conservative Muslims and conservative Christians are more prone to such acts. Of course, we can give a go to conservative Catholic clergy as well, who knows?

> If you've got nothing more to add then let's call it a day here.

Sure, yet I'm still insisting the total ban on conservatives, given your logic. To be honest, it really would solve many issues but hey.