Politics often defeat the purpose of its Exitance. Mainly this is caused by socio-economic woes that quickly transcend the boarders of neighbouring states. Most evidently these are related to economic crisis, wars or misguided Objective that slow down each & every economy by causing macro-economic concerns, humanitarian anxieties and minority fears. This has become the context for socio-economic development around the World, in general, and in the EU, in particular. The question boils down to the role Public Officials play in leading or misleading all participant or stakeholders for community development and their ability to narrow down an argument for socio-economic development? or better yet Can civil Society Facilitate a Socio-economic order that is characterized by less economic Shocks and more development efforts?


In my opinion, the answer is Yes, if there is a Public Strategic Framework that successfully regulates all socio-economic activities then progress may become feasible and indeed possible! The best economic regulator, however, appears to be a free market economy. This has been proven & witnessed by the observed behaviour of state vs market actors in many EU states & around the World. When state actors – Politicians and Institutions, misspell the guiding principles of Socio-economic growth they become immediately subjected to market discontent, resulting in strikes, laying out certain demands and conditions, often leading to Political change that raise new expectation, which often prove to be of no avail.

The observation above poses the question: Who appears the real Regulator of the Socio-economic system – the market or state actors? The answer to this question is found in the principles guiding the economic functioning of states or a system of States. Do these systems view social progress as a result of a sound market success or of a state performance? In my view, the well-being of any state is in direct proportion to the level of economic development & growth attributed to private industries, market development and growth. Market success, however, seems to depend on an administrative framework that either facilitates or impedes market development.

In view of the above, if the existing legal-administrative framework in all EU states were to focus on Facilitating business interactions and on helping enhance market performance; Providing sources for entrepreneurial funding and development; Reducing state powers in management of economic activities; & Limiting administrative inertia by supporting excessive government services & benefits THEN one can argue that EU is a Political Union governed in the right Economic direction. If such efforts are not on the Agenda of Political Parties in member states, then one can argue the Union is being Governed in the wrong Direction.

Throughout its existence the EU has become an administrative centered Union with legal statutes providing a certain sense of stability for all member states, however, its successful development and market growth has been limited by several internal and external socio-economic factors. One set of external factors belong to the degree of Autonomy in security, allowing EU to convey an economic agenda protecting business interests and growth (expanding economic interests) outside its boundaries. The lack of security Autonomy also limits the number of economic initiatives and market expansion to neighbouring countries of EU and outside its regional boundaries. This is turn limits the Socio-economic potential of EU and reduces the number of viable and mutually beneficial business initiatives and partnerships with other countries and regions throughout the WORLD.

Another set of factors on the domestic front pertain to the manner of empowerment of member states. The EU seems to financially support all member states; however, this often drives unhealthy Political Competition and Develops a Political Framework based on Corruption, Intellectual Theft and Unskilful Equality that proves to be unproductive & ultimately slows downs economic development and growth. Most notably such a manner of EU Governance leads to:

- Centralized Government Funding fostering Administrative, Party and/or State Economy rather than fundamental market economic prospects for growth;

- Public Institutions become not only distributors of EU development funding but also Administrative Consultants in the process of managing EU capital. This immediately reduces funding for growth of any socio-economic activity by 20-40%;

- Centralized funding delays project initiation and completion as the Government and Administration often becomes a middleman in the process of management and distribution of all available funding to market participants;

- Promotes unhealthy Political Competition and creates prospects for illusionary economic growth; thus, the need for direct funding of business initiative and enterprises become more effective and efficient in growing the market sector of the Economy;

- EU funding must become available directly to professional (business) Organizations so that market players can develop their capacities irrespective of Political, Ethnic or Religious Affiliations. Otherwise, business organization and entrepreneurs will eventually become subjected to one or another Form of socio-economic discrimination; subjected to intellectual theft by Political parties and administrative servants; thus, slowing down economic progress and negating the benefits of free market and entrepreneurial growth;

- EU Military institution need to provide their own security and change the economic model of business funding to member states to become better prepared to the economic challenges of today and a more competitive Political, Economic and Military UNION;

- If EU Administration and Institutions cannot provide their own Security; ultimately all EU states will not be able lead an Independent Foreign Policy and Reach independent Economic OBJECTIVES;

- The manner in which EU public and private organizations are funded fosters Political and Administrative Corruption by empowering the wrong people or System in the process of distributing the available funding to state & business actors and thus creating artificial barriers for economic prosperity, development, and growth.