For instance for Germany (and maybe Austria?) major factor could be aversion to nationalism?
The theory goes that this is favourable for the wealthy euros in power because it lets them hold on to their wealth.
But I don't think there's much of a correlation. People forget that migration was much easier administratively before WW1. Austria-Hungary was a multicultural state with a dozen languages whose residents could live anywhere within the borders: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austria-Hungary#/media/File:Au...
Similarly the British Empire had free movement of people within it.
As for Germany, by the way, the explanation is kind of simple. Contrary to popular belief, the German border cannot be effectively closed, and once someone has seeked for asylum, this needs to be checked. At the same time, the Dublin II regulation is extremely unfair and unsolidaric, it was designed for a few refugees here and there, and insisting on it would have tumbled Greece even further into crisis and alienated Italy. More importantly, however, the German constitution would have made rejecting refugees impossible, as it guarantees the right to asylum to someone who comes from a country in which a war rages. Moreover, rejecting them would also have violated Article 18 of the EU constitution, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the 1951 Refugee Convention. This is constitutional law and ratified international law, so Merkel thought something like "Blimey, what do I do now? Break all these laws and loose in front of the Supreme Court or European Court of Human Rights , or risk my career while standing in for those fancy human rights values I've always held speeches about?"
So, every conflict becomes measurable in terms of money. Thus, citizens become aware of the true cost of it. When you have conscription, you cannot measure how much each of the soldiers loses in terms of money - they don't ask them such a question deliberately.
Also, when all citizens (women and "disabled") are forced to pay for the military equally, they will tend less to be provoked into a war - it may cost too much for them. Get it?
By the way, I would support new British Empire, if its authorities would be decent people (as it usually happened). I'm from Ukraine : )
[Edit: UK armed forces seemed to have to suffer comparatively poor but very expensive equipment foisted on them for political reasons].
Have you ever heard of thista?
For any engineering problem one can make a "brute-force" algorithm, which theoretically finds its solution, describe that algorithm as a logical scheme (a directed graph with logic gates as nodes) and then one can use an AI agent to make that logical scheme easier to compute, by simplifying (through transformation rules like the De Morgan rule) unnecessary computation steps, input variables, etc. The solution to the problem can be found by calculation of that simplified version of the logical scheme.
The AI agent may be built from Neural Nets, or from the algorithm, which I call Evolution of Neural Graphs [0].
Some of interesting engineering problems are:
- to find a machine code for a controller of a bipedal robot [1], which makes it able to work in warehouses and factories;
- to find a machine code for a multiprocessor system [2], which behaves as an AI agent purposed for a given work to be done;
- to find a CAD file [3], which describes the design of a spheromak working with MHD generators;
- to find a file [4], which describes the manufacturing steps to produce the first molecular nanofactory in the world;
- etc…
Officials of what country would take it seriously, can you guess?
[0] https://github.com/Eug145/TetrAI/blob/master/Source-v0.92bet...
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKtHCFToYPY
[2] https://www.princeton.edu/news/2016/08/23/new-microchip-demo...
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynomak
[4] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zqyZ9bFl_qg
I have a reddit account, you may discuss it there too.
How would not going to war allow wealthy people to hold on to their wealth? That's a head scratcher, too.
And remind me, what are a lot of those immigrants fleeing from? Who was in favour of fucking up the already fucked up Middle East plenty more, for example? Who set the stage for ISIS? Wasn't it a nation riled up into a frenzy, with a "shared identity" pouring out every nook and cranny?
I guess the correlation is inverse, i.e. the more patriotic a people the less the diversities.
Although not sure why you see it that way, seems easier to explain the other way around to me.
So what all those countries have in common is that a large portion of the male population has actual military training.
the more cultural/social homogeneity the more willingness to fight a war for your country.
See Italy, Spain, Belgium for instance: people from different area of those countries really feel belonging to different cultures. Contrari to the Nordic & Easter European ones. In Germany is more of a historical thing instead.