Talk:Atlanticism

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Definition of the word[edit]

This Article still does not fully define what "Atlanticism" is.

There is an alternative use for this word, the belief in an ancient and hugely advanced human civilization that was destroyed. (Danekenism, after Erich von Däniken, is similar but considers the civilization of extra-terrestrial origin.) Atlanticism in this sense was coined by Ashworth, C.E., 1980. Flying Saucers, Spoon-Bending and Atlantis: A Structural Analysis of New Mythologies. Sociological Review, 28(2):353-76. The term Atlanticism in this meaning has been used lately by e.g. Walliss, John, & Spencer, Wayne, 2003. The Lost Aisle: Selling Atlantis in the "Spiritual Supermarket". Journal of Religion and Popular Culture, Vol. 3.

The word Atlanticist is also used of a person who believes in or promotes Atlanticism in this sence, such as author Graham Hancock.

Incidentally, the term Atlantis could also be split in two, one for Plato's tale of Atlantis, one for the modern myth of Atlantis as it appears in this form of Atlanticism (the belief in a hugely advanced civilization, the origin of other civilizations, that was lost).

Furthermore, in the text that exists, the phrase "Germany had invaded many Eastern European countries in World War II - French and British security guarantees to these countries were quietly forgotten." sounds like history revisionism to me.

In that case we need 2 articles Atlanticism (politics) and Atlanticism (mythology), turning this into a disambiguation page 9which would be great), --SqueakBox 15:14, May 14, 2005 (UTC)

2003 crisis and beyond[edit]

This particular part is not sourced and seems to imply that atlanticism means that European countries always have to agree or cannot criticize the US. I think that constitutes OR, and several sources can be found that claim the opposite: Atlanticism often includes the defense of the mutual values and interests which may imply that mutual criticism and discussion is necessary. Also, this particular part seems to overemphasize the current transatlantic issues, while atlanticism is more than 50+ years old... Sijo Ripa 13:57, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Breakdown cooperation NATO-EU[edit]

While I don't dispute that relations between the two organisations are not always like they should be, I disagree with the word "complete breakdown". The source used doesn't explain in any way how there is a complete breakdown. Sijo Ripa 13:36, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. Can we balance the stmt with a second source, and change the text without saying the opposite of the first source? -- Iterator12n Talk 16:09, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Conflicts between Grand Lodges and Grand Orients[edit]

It would be interesting if we could have valuable information detailing the history of socio-political conflicts between Grand Lodges and Grand Orients since the original 1877 schism. There are reports that several wars in South America and Africa were somewhow related to internal opposition between various factions of Masons. For instance, during the 1920s Mexican Civil War, there were essentially two or three groups of Masons that were literally figting each other for control over the Mexican government. In the 1980s, several CIA-sponsored coup d'états were thought to have been related to a fight for control between lodges. The First World War itself was the first major conflict involving opposing Masonic factions. Other possible conflicts include wars in the Congo and Burundi-Rwanda that involved opposing groups of American and French masons. ADM (talk) 05:57, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Everything you're saying is "reported" or "thought to be". That's a pretty good red flag there. Without proof from reliable (and especially in this case, objective) sources, all of the above is mere speculation and not encyclopedically appropriate. I also don't see what your point is - there were Masons on both sides of the Revolutionary and American Civil Wars, too, and there's a well-known story of Jonathan Maynard being rescued by another Mason, Chief Joseph Brant during one of the Indian Wars. Basically what you're trying to say is that one group of Masons (probably 40 or less, even) got mad at another group (of probably 40 or less), took up arms, and incited a country-wide civil war for control of what, exactly? When put that way, does it even sound plausible? MSJapan (talk) 06:06, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The revolutionary wars and the US civil war occured before the 1877 schism, so that is not the point at all. What I am saying is that there have probably been secretive Masonic wars of religion, in a similar way that Catholics and Protestants or Sunnis and Shiites have fought each other for control of their respective territories. One one hand, you have an ideology that is called atlantism, which is centered on the Scottish Rite cities of Washington, London and Ottawa, and on the other hand you have these anti-Atlantist Grand Orient types who operate from Brussels, Paris, Rome, Madrid and Istanbul. So there is clearly a history of political conflicts between different factions of Masons. ADM (talk) 06:21, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Specifically Canada and the United States, not Mexico"[edit]

The way this sentence is currently written, it completely ignores the rest of North America, e.g. the Caribbean. Given that it specifically states that the term only refers to cooperation between Canada, the States, and Europe, why not list just them? 192.253.205.187 (talk) 20:16, 2 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. I had thought it was reasonably implied that this didn't include the Caribbean, but I suppose this is a simpler way of keeping the definition precise. Peregrine981 (talk) 21:30, 2 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Atlanticism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:29, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Atlanticism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:30, 10 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Atlanticism in Germany[edit]

"Countries such as Denmark, Poland, Romania, and the United Kingdom are among those who generally hold strong Atlanticist views, while Germany tends to promote continentalist views and a strong European Union." In my opinion, this sentence is rather inaccurate. Germany is more in the middle between atlanticists and continentalists in Europe e.g. compared to France, which is much more continentalist. The transatlantic partnership or "transatlantische Partnerschaft" has been part of the "DNA" of German foreign policy since the 1950s, although not as strongly as in the United Kingdom. In the election campaign for the 2021 Bundestag elections, for example, the leading candidates of almost all parties (CDU, SPD, Greens, FDP) except the Left and the far right AfD always emphasised the great importance of the transatlantic partnership between Germany and the United States and of the NATO on a par with a strong European Union when asked about their foreign policy stance. The same applies to the election programmes of these parties. This can also be seen in the many German-American institutions such as the German Marshall Fund and the Atlantik-Brücke.TillF (talk) 16:20, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Good point. I have an appointment today, but could work on this soon, if you haven't already. Lindenfall (talk) 17:55, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Till: I've been hoping to see your edits here, since your subject knowledge seems broad, and the article seems somewhat lacking in that insight. I haven't done much on this page, just added Paul Cravath's American role, in attempting to record what a consequential and fascinating character he was. Lindenfall (talk) 22:10, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

EU is not declining[edit]

Trained political economist here. If you take a list of every country in the world and filter it for countries by raw political power and countries which have a high quality of living, with a population above 30 million, with the exception of only 4 countries (the US, Canada, Japan, South Korea) the rest are all in Europe. Only a handful of countries outside Europe are seeing rapid improvements in quality of life metrics which will bring them up to par with Europe in terms of HDI ranking in the next twenty years barring major shifts in current trends. The statement that the power of the European Union is declining is unsourced, counter-factual, violates the rule against weasel words, and does not belong in an encyclopedia. If you look at trips made abroad by every President since 1991, trips to Europe absolutely dominate the list. If you look at trading patterns for almost any country in the world, the US and/or Europe dominate the foreign trade of almost every other country, I can't think of an exception to this. The majority of global GDP is from NATO. Remove the entire last sentence of the introduction, it is simply incorrect. Stidmatt (talk) 00:23, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Atlanticism&oldid=1205465624"