In this paper I try to refute the thesis that European integration – the way the European states embarked upon with the creation of The European Coal and Steel Community – was indispensable for the preservation of peace among the continent’s nations. The main line of argument is that, instead, the integration process was a logical consecquence of the reluctance of states to renounce domestic interventionist policies inherited from the war (and interwar) period. The beginnings of European integration are usually presented under the form of a dilemma: integrate or fight. I believe that this is a false alternative, and that the dilemma was actually a “trilemma”: integrate, fight or return to the sound policies of free trade and laissez-faire. Liberalism, that is.
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read
the IDEAS help
page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS
site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Publisher Info
Article provided by Department of International Business and Economics from the Academy of Economic Studies Bucharest in its journal Romanian Economic Journal.
Volume (Year): 10 (2007) Issue (Month): 25 (November) Pages: 222-232 Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML
(with abstract),
plain text
(with abstract),
BibTeX,
RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite),
ReDIF
Find related papers by JEL classification: F15 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Economic Integration F5 - International Economics - - International Relations and International Political Economy B53 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Current Heterodox Approaches - - - Austrian