Euro Area

[InsaneApache]

But under one Europe, wouldn't everyone be together as one? Standing together against the threats of China, Russia and the US?

Replace Europe with Jugoslavia and that went well didn't it?

[Beskar]

Replace Europe with Jugoslavia and that went well didn't it?

Apples and Oranges, I don't think ethic cleansing would occurring in the Europe Union, plus Yugoslavia collapsed after a very bad economic bankruptcy due to Western powers blocking Yugoslavian exports. In the beginning there were even many plans for further mergers and the creation of the Balkan Federation, but this was stopped by Stalin.

In return, I could reply with "United States of America", "Germany" and other such examples...

[Papewaio]

Apples and Oranges, I don't think ethic cleansing would occurring in the Europe Union,

Why not? History says otherwise. If the EU collapses to be like Greece you will get Golden Dawns gaining strength everywhere. Both they, Germany's Brown Shirts and Italy's Black Shirts rose to power in collapsing economies. Spain's facists came to power slightly differently but again on the back of poverty.

It is not like Europeans have fundamentally changed it is their economies and being the potential nuclear battlefield between two superpowers that dampened warlike and racist tendancies.

How are Romas being treated in the EUs collapsing economies? Take a good look and you will see that old racial tension festering. Of course the cries will be they steal, abuse welfare, don't work, commit crimes. I'm sure the economic losses they cause will be paltry compared to the banks and speculators. But the Gypsyies are a much more accessible people to make an example of and as economies collapse populist leaders need to show their strength credentials.

[Fragony]

Why not? History says otherwise. If the EU collapses to be like Greece you will get Golden Dawns gaining strength everywhere. Both they, Germany's Brown Shirts and Italy's Black Shirts rose to power in collapsing economies. Spain's facists came to power slightly differently but again on the back of poverty.

It is not like Europeans have fundamentally changed it is their economies and being the potential nuclear battlefield between two superpowers that dampened warlike and racist tendancies.

How are Romas being treated in the EUs collapsing economies? Take a good look and you will see that old racial tension festering. Of course the cries will be they steal, abuse welfare, don't work, commit crimes. I'm sure the economic losses they cause will be paltry compared to the banks and speculators. But the Gypsyies are a much more accessible people to make an example of and as economies collapse populist leaders need to show their strength credentials.

I don't see such a thing happening really but I won't say it's impossible.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Apples and Oranges, I don't think ethic cleansing would occurring in the Europe Union, plus Yugoslavia collapsed after a very bad economic bankruptcy due to Western powers blocking Yugoslavian exports. In the beginning there were even many plans for further mergers and the creation of the Balkan Federation, but this was stopped by Stalin.

In return, I could reply with "United States of America", "Germany" and other such examples...

The US and Germany have shared narratives that bind them together and define a unified national character - the only unifying narrative across Europe is the fight to prevent the spread of Islam, otherwise European history is one of conflict and constantly shifting Alliances.

The Germans and the Brits and the Dutch beat Napoleon, The Brits the French and the Poles and Czechs beat Hitler...

There isn't a common narrative until you go back to Ancient Rome, and that doesn't include the Germans.

The current talk of "irreversible" Union is historically myopic because there will be another war in Europe, it is just a question of when.

The question of countering China is a valid one, and it is worth pointing out that European politics meant that the initial response to Napoleon, Lenin, and Hitler was woefully inadequate, but it remains a fact that co-operation does not require Union and that enforced Union is not a good idea because a House Divided will fall. Better in that case for Europe to be many houses instead of one.

[Beskar]

The question of countering China is a valid one, and it is worth pointing out that European politics meant that the initial response to Napoleon, Lenin, and Hitler was woefully inadequate, but it remains a fact that co-operation does not require Union and that enforced Union is not a good idea because a House Divided will fall. Better in that case for Europe to be many houses instead of one.

Admittedly, I am in the mind of a European Federation or a Strong Confederation. I would naturally prefer the first for ideological reasons, but I can accept the second for practical reasons. Either way, I don't believe in strong centralisation, I believe administration should be at the regional level. Only things that I believe should be nation/supernatural are matters such as defence.

Also believe in a "Constitution". For example, like America's, which ensures a rule of law which helps prevent abuse or "worst come" situations that people dread, and enshrine Human Rights such as freedom of speech and freedom of religion.

[SoFarSoGood]

The US Constitution is something like 2 pages... the EU one over 3000. The point 'basic principles' are fine but the EU wants to control everything. We also have shared defence organisation by the way... it's called NATO. Why then do we need a European Army at the beck and call of the unelected?

[rory_20_uk]

The US Constitution is something like 2 pages... the EU one over 3000. The point 'basic principles' are fine but the EU wants to control everything. We also have shared defence organisation by the way... it's called NATO. Why then do we need a European Army at the beck and call of the unelected?

To play Devil's Advocate, the brevity of some elements has led to misunderstandings.

In the USA a small group initially had a constitution and others could either join or not. The EU has a great number together and finally is trying to codify it - without the ability for those that don't like it to leave.

In the USA, the population was relatively homogenous, as a scorched earth policy was adopted to the natives and people had chosen to leave Europe because of all the baggage.

[SoFarSoGood]

In the USA, the population was relatively homogenous

And in Europe?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Admittedly, I am in the mind of a European Federation or a Strong Confederation. I would naturally prefer the first for ideological reasons, but I can accept the second for practical reasons. Either way, I don't believe in strong centralisation, I believe administration should be at the regional level. Only things that I believe should be nation/supernatural are matters such as defence.

Also believe in a "Constitution". For example, like America's, which ensures a rule of law which helps prevent abuse or "worst come" situations that people dread, and enshrine Human Rights such as freedom of speech and freedom of religion.

I don't care - I want the next generation to be safe and happy, ideaology is for universities, not politics. Europe's leaders fail to understand this basic point, which is why I don't want Britain any closer to Europe than absolutely necessary.

The question you need to ask is "what makes good governance."

[Kralizec]

I don't care - I want the next generation to be safe and happy, ideaology is for universities, not politics. Europe's leaders fail to understand this basic point, which is why I don't want Britain any closer to Europe than absolutely necessary.

The question you need to ask is "what makes good governance."

All politics is ideology at some level.

The UK conservative party claims to reject ideology, instead preferring pragmaticism and slow gradual changes (to what end, they don't know beforehand). Which doesn't mean that they don't have an actual ideology, just that's it's not coherent and that the positions they take are not necessarily predictable.

[rory_20_uk]

Their ideology is pragmatism.

Although Labour's position could be viewed as more coherant, that is because they have traditionally chosen a monolithic approach where internal dissent was effectively crushed. THe idiology there appears to be that failing of spending money only indicates that they didn't borrow enough to spend.