8 ms·

The Future of Europe: An Interview with George Soros

86 points by ivancdg 12y ago

anigbrowl 12y ago
This is a bit off the beaten track for HN, but thanks for posting it. It's rare to see this sort of in-depth policy analysis in the click-driven daily news media. This is a very interesting time historically, but also a dangerous one. The Economist has also had some excellent coverage of these issues recently, not least a lengthy essay on democracy: http://www.economist.com/news/essays/21596796-democracy-was-most-successful-political-idea-20th-century-why-has-it-run-trouble-and-what-can-be-do http://www.economist.com/news/essays/21596796-democracy-was-... and this editorial: http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21591853-century-there-are-uncomfortable-parallels-era-led-outbreak http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21591853-century-there...
- kzahel 12y ago
  I would hardly call that an essay. I would call it propaganda straight out of a public high school civics/US History textbook.
k0mplex 12y ago
If you don't read the New York Review of Books already, and you like periodicals like the New Yorker and Economist, I recommend adding it to your list - and this article is a good example of why. Also, this was such a great point by Soros from the interview: "According to Max Planck, among others, subatomic phenomena have a dual character: they can manifest themselves as particles or waves. Something similar applies to human beings: they are part freestanding individuals or particles and partly components of larger entities that behave like waves. The impact they make on reality depends on which alternative dominates their behavior. There are potential tipping points from one alternative to the other but it is uncertain when they will occur and the uncertainty can be resolved only in retrospect."
- spikels 12y ago
  Soros is wrong here. Max Planck was actually strongly against the duality interpretation and his influence suppressed Einstein and others correct interpretation for several decades. http://books.google.com/books?id=xsSv3kSDEd8C&lpg=PA8&ots=9LKS3lWB50&dq=planck%20rejected%20duality&pg=PA8#v=onepage&q=planck%20rejected%20duality&f=false http://books.google.com/books?id=xsSv3kSDEd8C&lpg=PA8&ots=9L...
- effdee 12y ago
  Gustave Le Bon would certainly agree to this observation since it is the essence of his 1896 book "The Crowd: A Study of the Popular Mind". Staying with physics analogies, this book is like a photon. It is illuminating. Proper absorption leads to a higher state and the world will look a bit darker afterwards.
- singold 12y ago
  Really? Using physics that you[0] don't understand to justify some kind of pseudo-science? [0] I refer to Soros, not to k0mplex
lispm 12y ago
Soros has been manipulating markets for his financial advantage. What's new? He has speculated against the Euro and now he is unhappy with the outcome.
dharma1 12y ago
for someone who's 83, that's pretty clear thinking. thanks for posting.
- lispm 12y ago
  his 'clear' thinking is based on three m-words: me more money
spikels 12y ago
Don't waste your time trying to understand the rantings of this lunatic. Like many of the uber rich he made his money from being lucky and political connections not from actually learning anything new. His incoherent theories (e.g. reflexivity) are simply cover for whatever scheme he is currently perusing to gain even more weath and power.
- effdee 12y ago
  I think this a bad advice. Trying to ignore Soros is a bit like trying to ignore an earthquake.
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
- alandarev 12y ago
  And what if not? What if people get rich not due to being lucky? Said that, I agree that there is little value in the article.
- gwert 12y ago
  He is one of the few people in the world who consistently make money off of forex trading, and the scale of his bets are huge. Saying he is just a rich person who got lucky completely underestimates how smart and powerful he is.
  - zeno334 12y ago
    Do you have a source for that forex claim? I remember reading in one of his books that he was never able to consistently profit from fx trading.
- cynicalkane 12y ago
  This is a textbook ad hominem attack. It's trying to discredit someone using insults, and it is considered a logical fallacy. It's not the insult that makes an ad hominem, it's using with insults as an excuse to dismiss someone's arguments. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem It doesn't help that the OP's insult premise, despite its frothing anger, is your garden-variety, vaguely conspiratorial hate of evil rich people. This sort of stuff should come with a big [CITATION NEEDED] for those of us who don't believe the rich are a big conspiracy of fortunate sons, out to get the common people. But what's most ironic is that Soros being one of the world's top finance guys gives him more credibility, not less; unless you believe he has a nefarious plot to make billions by lying in magazine interviews or something.
gbog 12y ago
It is funny to see the construction of Europe, which is arguably the first time in human history that different groups of people willingly tend towards a common political entity without external threat and blood spilled all over, criticised from inside and outside by the likes of Soros, who will never understand that finance is a tool and not an end. I hope Merkel and other Eurocrats will firmly continue to not listen to his "well-intentioned free advices". All proportions aside, it is a bit like those who criticize Wikipedia, which is one of the greatest production of human minds, just because some of their edits have been reverted.
- andybak 12y ago
  You speak as if Soros holds some enmity for the European project but everything I've read indicates that he thinks it's eventual success to be of critical importance and he has spent a lot of time and effort in trying to increase its chances of long-term success.
  - gbog 12y ago
    I do not read Soros' prose on a daily basis. From the interview it seems he dreams of some financial Europe fitting his dreams and needs. It is unlikely that a majority of Europeans would share his values. So he is no enemy, but his comments are aggressive and dismissive of Europeans.
    - streptomycin 12y ago
      I think you're misreading the interview. He knows that the majority of Europeans don't share his values. He was hoping that would change, given the recent economic issues which seem to be largely driven by the euro. But as he said: The window of opportunity to bring about radical change in the rules governing the euro has closed. ... I am giving up on changing the financial arrangements, the creditor–debtor relationship that has now turned into a permanent system. I will continue to focus on politics, because that is where I expect dramatic developments. He then goes on to express nothing but positive sentiment regarding the potential for beneficial political developments stemming from the EU.
Bpal 12y ago
Soros juggles the facts in his favour -that's for sure, but the general geopolitical picture is given about right. Like Germany being the dominant player in Europe and Russia helping out with Middle East chemical weapon. These are well-known facts, what would be really great to find out is what bonus the leader of the country brings to the table of his own nation and at what cost. Not sure, we'll ever find out.
pessimizer 12y ago
Soros: "The incestuous relationship between national authorities and bank managements [is what's wrong with European banking.] France in particular is famous for its inspecteurs de finance, who end up running its major banks. Germany has its Landesbanken and Spain its caixas, which have unhealthy connections with provincial politicians. These relationships were a major source of weakness in the European banking system and played an important part in the banking crisis that is still weighing on the eurozone. The proposed banking union should have eliminated them, but they were largely preserved, mainly at German insistence."

86 points by ivancdg 12y ago

This is a bit off the beaten track for HN, but thanks for posting it. It's rare to see this sort of in-depth policy analysis in the click-driven daily news media. This is a very interesting time historically, but also a dangerous one. The Economist has also had some excellent coverage of these issues recently, not least a lengthy essay on democracy: http://www.economist.com/news/essays/21596796-democracy-was-most-successful-political-idea-20th-century-why-has-it-run-trouble-and-what-can-be-do http://www.economist.com/news/essays/21596796-democracy-was-... and this editorial: http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21591853-century-there-are-uncomfortable-parallels-era-led-outbreak http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21591853-century-there...

kzahel 12y ago
I would hardly call that an essay. I would call it propaganda straight out of a public high school civics/US History textbook.

k0mplex 12y ago

If you don't read the New York Review of Books already, and you like periodicals like the New Yorker and Economist, I recommend adding it to your list - and this article is a good example of why. Also, this was such a great point by Soros from the interview: "According to Max Planck, among others, subatomic phenomena have a dual character: they can manifest themselves as particles or waves. Something similar applies to human beings: they are part freestanding individuals or particles and partly components of larger entities that behave like waves. The impact they make on reality depends on which alternative dominates their behavior. There are potential tipping points from one alternative to the other but it is uncertain when they will occur and the uncertainty can be resolved only in retrospect."

spikels 12y ago
Soros is wrong here. Max Planck was actually strongly against the duality interpretation and his influence suppressed Einstein and others correct interpretation for several decades. http://books.google.com/books?id=xsSv3kSDEd8C&lpg=PA8&ots=9LKS3lWB50&dq=planck%20rejected%20duality&pg=PA8#v=onepage&q=planck%20rejected%20duality&f=false http://books.google.com/books?id=xsSv3kSDEd8C&lpg=PA8&ots=9L...
effdee 12y ago
Gustave Le Bon would certainly agree to this observation since it is the essence of his 1896 book "The Crowd: A Study of the Popular Mind". Staying with physics analogies, this book is like a photon. It is illuminating. Proper absorption leads to a higher state and the world will look a bit darker afterwards.
singold 12y ago
Really? Using physics that you[0] don't understand to justify some kind of pseudo-science? [0] I refer to Soros, not to k0mplex

lispm 12y ago

Soros has been manipulating markets for his financial advantage. What's new? He has speculated against the Euro and now he is unhappy with the outcome.

dharma1 12y ago

for someone who's 83, that's pretty clear thinking. thanks for posting.

lispm 12y ago
his 'clear' thinking is based on three m-words: me more money

spikels 12y ago

Don't waste your time trying to understand the rantings of this lunatic. Like many of the uber rich he made his money from being lucky and political connections not from actually learning anything new. His incoherent theories (e.g. reflexivity) are simply cover for whatever scheme he is currently perusing to gain even more weath and power.

effdee 12y ago
I think this a bad advice. Trying to ignore Soros is a bit like trying to ignore an earthquake.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
alandarev 12y ago
And what if not? What if people get rich not due to being lucky? Said that, I agree that there is little value in the article.
gwert 12y ago
He is one of the few people in the world who consistently make money off of forex trading, and the scale of his bets are huge. Saying he is just a rich person who got lucky completely underestimates how smart and powerful he is.
- zeno334 12y ago
  Do you have a source for that forex claim? I remember reading in one of his books that he was never able to consistently profit from fx trading.
cynicalkane 12y ago
This is a textbook ad hominem attack. It's trying to discredit someone using insults, and it is considered a logical fallacy. It's not the insult that makes an ad hominem, it's using with insults as an excuse to dismiss someone's arguments. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem It doesn't help that the OP's insult premise, despite its frothing anger, is your garden-variety, vaguely conspiratorial hate of evil rich people. This sort of stuff should come with a big [CITATION NEEDED] for those of us who don't believe the rich are a big conspiracy of fortunate sons, out to get the common people. But what's most ironic is that Soros being one of the world's top finance guys gives him more credibility, not less; unless you believe he has a nefarious plot to make billions by lying in magazine interviews or something.

gbog 12y ago

It is funny to see the construction of Europe, which is arguably the first time in human history that different groups of people willingly tend towards a common political entity without external threat and blood spilled all over, criticised from inside and outside by the likes of Soros, who will never understand that finance is a tool and not an end. I hope Merkel and other Eurocrats will firmly continue to not listen to his "well-intentioned free advices". All proportions aside, it is a bit like those who criticize Wikipedia, which is one of the greatest production of human minds, just because some of their edits have been reverted.

andybak 12y ago
You speak as if Soros holds some enmity for the European project but everything I've read indicates that he thinks it's eventual success to be of critical importance and he has spent a lot of time and effort in trying to increase its chances of long-term success.
- gbog 12y ago
  I do not read Soros' prose on a daily basis. From the interview it seems he dreams of some financial Europe fitting his dreams and needs. It is unlikely that a majority of Europeans would share his values. So he is no enemy, but his comments are aggressive and dismissive of Europeans.
  - streptomycin 12y ago
    I think you're misreading the interview. He knows that the majority of Europeans don't share his values. He was hoping that would change, given the recent economic issues which seem to be largely driven by the euro. But as he said: The window of opportunity to bring about radical change in the rules governing the euro has closed. ... I am giving up on changing the financial arrangements, the creditor–debtor relationship that has now turned into a permanent system. I will continue to focus on politics, because that is where I expect dramatic developments. He then goes on to express nothing but positive sentiment regarding the potential for beneficial political developments stemming from the EU.

Bpal 12y ago

Soros juggles the facts in his favour -that's for sure, but the general geopolitical picture is given about right. Like Germany being the dominant player in Europe and Russia helping out with Middle East chemical weapon. These are well-known facts, what would be really great to find out is what bonus the leader of the country brings to the table of his own nation and at what cost. Not sure, we'll ever find out.

pessimizer 12y ago

Soros: "The incestuous relationship between national authorities and bank managements [is what's wrong with European banking.] France in particular is famous for its inspecteurs de finance, who end up running its major banks. Germany has its Landesbanken and Spain its caixas, which have unhealthy connections with provincial politicians. These relationships were a major source of weakness in the European banking system and played an important part in the banking crisis that is still weighing on the eurozone. The proposed banking union should have eliminated them, but they were largely preserved, mainly at German insistence."