Europe

[Beskar]

It will get to a point that everything is under one-power. Best to make sure it is as democratic as possible.

[LittleGrizzly]

I don't think you can really make that assertion, if you look at fairly modern history things have become more seperated, British empire, Yugoslavia ect.

Outside of the EU and maybe China extending its control over Taiwan and Hong Kong...

Edit: On the other hand things like globalisation, cheap air travel and the internet is making the world a much smaller place. I don't think you can assert so surely that things are going to be all under one power, i think you could call it quite likely though...

[Beskar]

I am not implying it is any time soon, but it will most likely happen eventually. By the current rate of things, it is developing in a way against the interests of the people as a whole.

[Furunculus]

It will get to a point that everything is under one-power. Best to make sure it is as democratic as possible.

ah, so the justification is that because science fictions world government is inevitable, best we get started quick so we have Ian M Banks benign utopia rather than David Wingroves authoritarian dystopia?

[Beskar]

ah, so the justification is that because science fictions world government is inevitable, best we get started quick so we have Ian M Banks benign utopia rather than David Wingroves authoritarian dystopia?

Just saying "science fiction" just makes your point invalid as it means you do not know your history or what history is being made. It isn't Europe that is coming together, there is also things such as NAFTA which will eventually be taking a similar route. Did you even know they wrote a new American constitution in the 1970's? It wasn't put into place, but you could probably find it laying about.

[Furunculus]

Just saying "science fiction" just makes your point invalid as it means you do not know your history or what history is being made.

It isn't Europe that is coming together, there is also things such as NAFTA which will eventually be taking a similar route.

Did you even know they wrote a new American constitution in the 1970's? It wasn't put into place, but you could probably find it laying about.

you might think so.

last time i checked NAFTA wasn't a political confederation, it was a free-trade bloc. sounds great.

why do you mention this, is it because you think i am against change? i'm not against change, i am against foolish change.

[Beskar]

last time i checked NAFTA wasn't a political confederation, it was a free-trade bloc. sounds great.

So was Europe at first, how did that turn out?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

So was Europe at first, how did that turn out?

Authoritarian and undemocratic. Europe was always meant to be a federal project, that has been admitted a few times by the French and Germans. At the same time, integration has always proceeded at a fairly even pace.

This is largely because Eurocrats see federalism as both desireable and inevitable. It is not necessarily either.

[Furunculus]

So was Europe at first, how did that turn out?

i don't think that NAFTA arose from the ashes of WW2 as a project chiefly architected to prevent WW3 by its two biggest cheer leaders (the guilty conscience and unwilling host), via the method of ever deeper union.

so i'm not really sure where you are going with this?
i don't believe that free-trade blocs like NAFTA are bad.
i don't believe regional forums like ASEAN are bad.
i don't believe collective defense pacts like NATO are bad.

i do think that Britain, on balance, will be worse off within in a federal europe.
i do think that governance in Britain will become less representative in a federal europe.