Europe

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Aim is not expansion, it is more a unity. Unity can bring greater benefits and causing the breakdown of nationality which serves nothing more causing conflict. When at discussion tables, a strong united Europe would be a far more formidable power than any of the individual states by themselves. Causing unity will start destroying boundaries which separate people, and instead of people fighting amongst themselves, they will be fighting together. It brings a brand new focus and energy with it. The whole is greater than the sum of its parts. It will end disparities and be an uniting banner. There is far more to be done and things that should be done on a fundamental level that cannot be done efficiently otherwise.

So you want the Europeans to band together and inflict their will on others?

[Beskar]

So you want the Europeans to band together and inflict their will on others?

The opposite. Band together to prevent the other inflicting its will on it. If Europe does become the true democratic state as well, it will influence others int he world to adopt the same/similar as the people will want it.

[seireikhaan]

The opposite. Band together to prevent the other inflicting its will on it. If Europe does become the true democratic state as well, it will influence others int he world to adopt the same/similar as the people will want it.

That is quite faulty. A united Europe will not cease conflict, no more than a united Spain, or Britain, or Germany, or Soviet Union did. It merely changes whom the combatants will be. When Spain was united, it looked beyond its borders. When Britain was united, it looked beyond its borders. When Germany was united, it looked beyond its borders. When the USSR was united, it looked beyond its borders. When America finally hit the Pacific solidly, it looked beyond its borders.

All which can cease conflicts is mutually assured destruction.

[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.