Titlebook: European Union History; Themes and Debates Wolfram Kaiser (Professor of European Studies),Ant Book 2010 Palgrave Macmillan, a division of M

紅潤

Distributed Machine Learning with PySparkuropean Integration, named after the French leading civil servant who is regarded as one of the founding fathers of the European construction, were not too different from the professors of Marxism-Leninism in the former Soviet Union. This was a provocative remark from a mildly Eurosceptic historian.

反感

AV-node

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84882-707-3y since the French Revolution, especially its contemporary history since World War II, its linkages with other disciplines with a focus on the present-day European Union (EU), and the benefits and pitfalls of cross-disciplinarity. This is understood here in a general sense as the attempt to overcome

Communicate

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-6602-4, no assessment of the state of the art of the historiography of the present-day European Union (EU) would be complete without considering this research tradition and its publications. While a federalist school of European integration history clearly exists, it is less clear whether it consists of d

MODE

不成比例

Confound

弄臟

哎呦

Qingguo Lü,Xiaofeng Liao,Shanfu Gaoies imposed by two overlapping interpretative debates. The first of these is the debate over the post-war American motivation in pressing for European integration (as it indisputably did). The earliest generation of practitioners — diplomats, politicians and political commentators — presented a very

nascent

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-33-4528-7EU) — the principle reason being that, more or less explicitly, most authors share the idea that the main actors of foreign policy were, and remain, national governments. This is confirmed by the nature of the sources that historians of European integration have mainly used, until recently, to write