Europe

[Meneldil]

I think we have a very different definition of what a nation is.

Care to elaborate what is your definition of a nation then? The only people who still claim nations are natural and have been there forever are nationalist nutjobs (from the left and from the right) and primordialist scholars (who are a tiny minority). The widespread consensus among scholars and students is that nations are born in the late 18th century (the modernist theory), either during the european revolutionnary wars (Renan, Kedourie), or after the industrial revolution (Gellner). Some other modernists point to South-America (Anderson) or to the US, but they also are a minority among modernists scholars.

Even Anthony Smith, who attempted to find a mindle-ground between primordialist and modernist approaches, with his 'pre-modern origins' confess that nations probably never came into existence before the 18th.

Now mind you, you're perfectly entitled to have your own definition of a nation. Hundred of scholars wrote book about nations and nationalism, and so far, they haven't reached an argument about what is a nation. But I hope you're part of the primordialist group rather than of the nationalist nutjobs one :-P

Furthermore, would you like to explain me how an European state would be more artificial than an Italian state? In 1850 most people in Italy didn't speak the same language, and didn't feel like having anything in common with people living on the other side of the peninsula.
The idea that an italian culture existed, and that italians should all live in a same state was pretty much only shared by the elites (and it's been like this for quite a while: Machiavelli wrote about it in the 16th). But your average Cesare most likely didn't give a crap. Note that the same was true for France, Spain or pretty much any country one century earlier (in fact, before the Revolution, many parts of what we call France now were considered as semi-independant States - Pays d'Etat - associated to the King of France - some tried to regain their independance during the Revolution).

Nowadays, we have people claiming we all share an European culture. Despite all our different languages, we're all (more or less) able to spout some gibberish in english. Whether what they say is true or not (I actually don't think it is), how are they crazier than Garibaldi?

Btw, when I say nations are the results of a historical process, I'm not necessarily saying they're built by men (or that they aren't). I'm just saying they certainly aren't a natural political organization, nor are they an ancient one.

As for your other arguments, they don't have much value. You're not even able to tell us why a german federation is okay, while an european one would lead to 1984, stalinism and what not. Your only excuse is 'balance'. Quite cheap ain't it, given that France and Germany now share much more than Cologne and Mecklemburg ever did.