The power of positive thinking?

I’ve wanted to write this post for a while. But given today’s results of the Irish referendum, it seems especially appropriate.

When we toured the Parliament last week, I was struck by this structure.

Called Confluences, it is a 36 meter high sculpture in stainless steel. Its parts hang from the ceiling but are not held together at any other point. Touch one part and the whole thing moves. Crafted by Belgian artist Olivier Strebelle, its name has various meanings:

–noun

1.	a flowing together of two or more streams, rivers, or the like: the confluence of the Missouri and Mississippi rivers.

2.	their place of junction: St. Louis is at the confluence of the Missouri and Mississippi rivers.

3.	a body of water formed by the flowing together of two or more streams, rivers, or the like.

4.	a coming together of people or things; concourse.

5.	a crowd or throng; assemblage.

On the tour, our speaker explained the symbolism of this statue was intentionally left ambiguous. Does the sculpture represent the joining of the 27 Member States to form the EU? Or does it represent Strasbourg, the other seat of the European Parliament and, as I mentioned earlier, the historical bone of contention between EU pioneers France and Germany? Is it a symbol that the EU faces; where touching one element/policy area/nation state/issue affects the whole? Does it represent governments at all? Does it represent Europeans coming together to celebrate their common history and geography as Europeans?

Throughout this whole trip, when certain officials have spoken of the EU they have called it the “EU project.” This process of integrating almost 400 million people, 27 nation states, 23 languages (so far) and 15 economies into one voice is an ongoing, evolutionary one. I find this concept and the acceptance of its premise by many within and without the EU, fascinating.

The EU’s motto is “United in diversity.” It sounds pretty and is a noble goal but how feasible is it? When we were at the German Bundesbunk school, one pupil mentioned the older generation’s apprehension to adopt the Euro. But she said the younger generations are more willing because they don’t have that sense of history invested in the German Mark, the Italian Lira or the French Franc. She said as the EU continues to bring prosperity to Europe, attitudes will change. Now, this seems to have hit the nail on the head.

In the absence of a common history, language, culture or any element that traditionally unites a people, shared affluence can be used to create a nation. This isn’t new for Canadians. That’s exactly what John A. MacDonald did to British North America in 1867. The hope is that in time this common culture will be fostered. Has this happened in Canada? If you ask me, no, it has not.

But can it happen in Europe? With the failure of the Constitutional Treaty—whose content is strikingly similar to the Lisbon Treaty save a few nationalist trappings like a common EU flag and national anthem— in 2006 and the failure of this first hurdle for the Lisbon Treaty, it doesn’t look good. It seems like nationalism—that sense that I am a member of this state and that means I’ll do whatever it takes to see it safe and posper –like we see in the United States and Russia, is proving to be the most enduring form of unity.

But it’s an interesting experiment. I, for one, will keep my eye on developments.