People in different country, may find that globalization and transnationalization of the nation also offer opportunities. Globalization in its literal sense is the process of transformation of local or regional phenomen into global ones. It can be described as a process by which the people of the world are unified into a single society and function together. Supporters of free trade claim that it increases economic prosperity as well as opportunity, especially among developing nations. It also enhances civil liberties and leads to a more efficient allocation of resources. Economic theories of comparative advantage suggest that free trade leads to a more efficient allocation of resources, with all countries involved in the trade benefiting. In general, this leads to lower prices, more employment, higher output and a higher standard of living for those in developing countries. The EU represents one of the greatest experiments in political and economic history. For the first time nations have chosen to surrender aspects of their national sovereignty to a central body that has a responsibility to ensure that they act for the good not only of themselves but of other nations as well. All of us can be part of EU in every single moment by travelling without visas, using euro, making business or applying european law. The EU provides the first example of a truly supranational body where the ambitions of nations curbed by a need to co-operate in order to succeed. This body helped bringing incredible political and economic stability to Europe. I would like to underline the force of globalization movement and the Euro impact, which is now a fact against all arguments.
Diverse from the Erasmus program, amongst other EU international interactions, Humanitarian and Developmental initiatives resulting in Nation Branding is a field that is hardly explored. This paper has tried to analyze the concept of supra-nation branding through the EU humanitarian and development program named EU Aid Volunteers Initiative, through focusing on how a supranational organization such as the EU would go about a nation branding initiative that promotes its collective values in Humanitarian and Development Aid. In order to explore the concept of supra-nation branding, it firsts gives a brief introduction about the initiative and identifies the key elements of EU nation branding as well as its humanitarian and development initiatives. Then, it analyzes it through Anholt’s lens and a SWOT analysis, followed by critiques and a conclusion. This analysis proved fruitful in terms of enabling a structural understanding behind the processes employed by the E.U Aid Volunteers Initiative and how it shall enable the E.U to advance its image as a supra-national entity both locally, regionally and internationally. In addition, as the European Union is an entity unlike any other it generates comprehension for future organizations motivated by a collectivity in idealisms and cultural identities, enabling the application of their country’s image abroad through a means of which embodies a form of cultural-humanitarian diplomacy.
Przeciwnicy szybkiego wejścia Polski do Europejskiej Unii Monetarnej (European Monetary Union – EMU) boją się jeszcze większego podporządkowania polskiej gospodarki największym w UE krajom i firmom; bądź co bądź ustępujemy poważnie korporacjom niemieckim, francuskim i włoskim. Stąd dyskusja między zwolennikami narodowego i ponadpaństwowego charakteru integracji. Aktualnie jesteśmy w Polsce w okresie dominacji argumentów na rzecz narodowego charakteru integracji. W warunkach ponadpaństwowego modelu integracji Polska musiałaby się podporządkować krajom i przedsiębiorstwom największym w Unii. Zwolennicy narodowego charakteru integracji nie mają szans na zwycięstwo w tej dyskusji, z kilku powodów. -- Po pierwsze, korzenie dzisiejszej Unii miały charakter ponadpaństwowy. Dotyczy to nie tylko Europejskiej Wspólnoty Węgla i Stali, lecz także kolejnych instytucjonalnych form tej integracji. -- Po drugie, rywalizacja Unii Europejskiej ze Stanami Zjednoczonymi (a więc z ponadpaństwowym organizmem gospodarczym) wskazywała i wskazuje na przewagę korzyści płynących z ponadpaństwowej formy integracji. -- Po trzecie, przyjmowanie do Unii Europejskiej krajów jaskrawo odbiegających od dominującego w UE poziomu (zwłaszcza jakościowego) mógło znaleźć uzasadnienie tylko w ponadpaństwowym charakterze integracji dopuszczającym przepływ dochodu z jednych krajów do drugich. -- Po czwarte, cykliczny rozwój gospodarek UE wspólnym wysiłkiem wymógł przeciwdziałania negatywnym skutkom tego rozwoju. Twierdzenie, ze wejście Polski do strefy euro umożliwi jej równoprawne decydowanie o przyszłości Unii, jest nieporozumieniem. Nie ma „sprawy polskiej” w kontekście euro. Jeśli nie wejdziemy do strefy euro, UE się przez to nie zawali. Przykład Wielkiej Brytanii świadczy, że jej rezygnacja z członkostwa w Unii nie doprowadzi Unii do upadku. Jeżeli Polska nie wejdzie do strefy euro, to strefa również będzie nadal istnieć. O jej przyszłości zdecydować może kolejny światowy kryzys walutowy, a nie rezygnacja Polski z wejścia do tej strefy.
EN
Opponents of a quick Poland’s entry to the EU/Monetary Union are afraid of a still greater subjection of the Polish economy to the biggest countries and companies in the EU; after all, we considerably yield to German, French and Italian corporations. Hence, there is the discussion between the advocates of the national and supranational nature of integration. At present, we are in Poland in the period of prevalence of arguments in favour of the national nature of integration. Under the conditions of the supranational model of integration, Poland would have to comply with the biggest countries and enterprises in the Union. Advocates of the national nature of integration do not have any chances for victory in this discussion for several reasons. -- First, the present Union’s roots had the supranational nature. This concerns not only the European Coal and Steel Community, but also subsequent institutional forms of this integration. -- Second, rivalry between the European Union and the United States (therefore, the supranational economic entity) indicated and still indicates the advantage of the benefits stemming from the supranational form of integration. -- Third, acceptance to the European Union of the countries sharply departing from the prevailing in the EU level (especially qualitative one) might have been justified only in the supranational character of integration allowing for transfer of income from some countries to other ones. -- Fourth, the cyclical development of EU economies by common efforts has forced countermeasures against negative consequences of that development. The allegation that Poland’s entry to the euro area will enable this country equal deciding about the Union’s future is a misapprehension. There is no “Polish matter” in the euro context. If we do not enter the euro area, the EU will not have collapsed due to that. The example of Great Britain evidences that its resignation from the EU membership will not have brought the Union to the fall. If Poland fails to enter the euro area, the zone will also exist henceforth. Its future may be decided by a further global monetary crisis and not Poland’s resignation from the entry to the zone.
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.