The idea of the United States of Europe is apsolute nonsense! No European nation wants that. According to recent opinion polls, there is not even a majority in Germany for it. Absurdly, the Germans despite this elect politicians into the government who have this goal of the United States of Europe. If, by the way, this goal of the United States of Europe continues to be pursued so successfully, not only Poland will leave the EU. I'm also adding part of my comment from below because it fits the topic. With accession to the EU, a nation partially relinquishes the right of self-determination. That is the most important right of a nation! That actually contradicts every constitution of every EU state. The individual European states could only become members of EU by circumventing their constitutions with legal tricks. Because no constitution of a European state allows such a comprehensive renunciation of the right of self-determination of the respective nation as is associated with the various treaties of the EU. In fact, accession to the EU was only possible through a breach of the law by the respective governments that signed the EU treaties! Even the completely undemocratic EU electoral law contradicts the democratic constitutions of the individual European states. In fact, no constitution allows foreign parliamentarians who are not elected in the country to decide on laws in the country. The EU Parliament is illegal according to every constitution of the respective EU countries and what was decided there should have no relevance at all for the individual EU countries. Only a relatively small minority of EU parliamentarians were elected in their own country. These are mostly foreigners in the EU Parliament who have not been elected by anyone in the country and who make the laws in the country! So this is extremely undemocratic and totally illegal under any constitution of any EU country. In addition It is also completely undemocratic and contradicts the constitutions of the EU states that 26 foreigners in the Council of the European Union who decide on important matters, which no one in the EU countries elected either. That disgusts me totally! The sooner this undemocratic turd implodes, the better.
My comments are often deleted . Disgusting . What I just said is how is United States going to work with differences in languages , culture, values , history , etc. Roman Empire was the last fragile United Europe . Unless United States of Adolf Hitler or Aryan
The biggest difference between English, French, Germans, Spaniards or Dutch in America and in Europe is that in America you had around a lifetime of legacy they didn't care much for, while in Europe blood was spilled many times for centuries or even millenia over the right to remain English, French, German. If you left everything behind to go start a new life in America, then you had nothing to lose.
@@sambuydens6418 Nah, that was hardly a war with pan-European goal. Bismarck specifically restrained the more aggressive German leaders from taking too much and getting an international intervention on their ass. It was part of the German unification, not pan-European.
If the United States of Europe came to fruition, I wonder how secession movements (like Catalonia) would interact with being absorbed into an even larger country. Edit: I didn't expect such a debate about Catalonia. I still have more questions! like what happens to France's overseas territories? Is Greenland apart of the USE, until it decides to leave (as per it's current agreement)?
As a catalan i can Tell you that this Will blow the independentist movement as far as they don't touch the language and don't bother much his leaders. Here, some people want to separate of Spain but Also stay in the EU, so to keep the nationalist Alive they may need 10 years to reestructure the públic opinion😂
It's actually to their interest, they 'll be a separate state and governed by catalonian politicians elected by their people, I guess the rest should be something like the european parliament elections
@@rippspeck a few thousand people daring to speak for entire regions ... and a couple of hundreds picking up weapons and resorting to terrorism ... are capable of splitting a society if the society has a more interdependent population.
if they try to replace EU, it will likely fail. A better approach would be for the countries willing to form USE, and provide a model that may convince others to join. The new country would itself be part of the EU.
It is unlikely they will do one of those approaches. I don't really think from one day to another we will have the USE. It's more of a progress bar slowly filling up with the years.
@@COPROO I think of it like the Kaiserreich happened. Slowly (good not slowly it happened rather fast but you get the idea) more and more kingdoms (or in this case countries) will join if it benefits them too and form a country.
I'd be really interested in seeing this situation re-evaluated given current escalations from Russia and unity between NATO and Europe, aswell as the drastic policy changes coming out of Germany!
Never going to work. Europe is too culturally different. No way an Estonian for example would think that they can be represented better by Brussels then their current government. Smaller countries would have almost no say.
@@PAllen74 cultural differences have never stopped us before, we have a longer history of United European states than we do of our small countries now. The Carolingian Empire, Rome, Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth and Holy Roman Empire are only a few examples.
@@PAllen74 The Americans are the enemy, they have threatened us recently for trying to federate, just like the Russians they are a direct threat to us.
It’s kinda interesting looking at pre civil war usa where most states basically saw themselves as separate entities but over time an American identity was created. The biggest difference tho is usa mostly had a common language and culture and Europe has tons, which is gonna be hard to overcome. It doesn’t help that European cultures have been developing for thousands of years while American culture was in its infancy.
Did it though? I mean eventually yes it did have the same language, but a lot of the early inhabitants of the US and its predecessor states did not speak English..
@@PradedaCech my bad, what I more ment was compared to Europe America had a much more homogeneous language. It was also more mixed around in the USA but in a United Europe each “state” would have its own language
I don’t see a problem. Look at Spain. Spain’s national language is Spanish but every region is allowed to teach their own language as well, so all spaniards speak Spanish and some speak their regional language. In the United States of Europe, English can be the official language of all states but every state is allowed to additionally teach their own language. Why English you might be wondering? Because most Europeans speak English and it is becoming unofficially the language of the world.
why would one want to "overcome" and not celebrate and learn from the different languages and cultures? Why would one want to exchange this wealth of civilization which is unique with a MacDonalds identity?
@@ektorpolykandriotis635 My question exactly. We have all the economic benefits of the single market even today, without the need to have to completely re-imagine our identity, and lose our rich and different national cultural heritage.
In the U.S. the federation succeeded because everybody identified themselves as "Colonists" or "americans". In europe eqach member nation has it's own history, language and identity that has been formed during hundreds of years. We are not "europeans", we are german, belgian, swedish, finnish... There is no way in hell you can get everybody to play nice and just give up on their identity, history, and freedom. I just don't see that happening.
Many people, including me, DO definitely say they are European, and most of them say they are both European, and [whatever the demonym of their people is]. I'm European and Ålandic. 🇪🇺🇦🇽
This idea of a EU state seems very globalist in nature. From the looks of it it would most likely diminish national sovereignty in the area. Also it may try to erode any pre existing cultures and traditions in order to make this “European” identity as a national one
@@glassychap1141 I agree. I will not give up on my identity without a fight. It's only been little over a 100 years since Finland got it's independence from swedish and russian colonizers, and i do not want to watch it being taken away by germans of all people.
@@DerClouder As you should, Finland is still a young country in terms of it being a independent nation. It should not give up its independence so quickly
The US model might be more familiar to Europeans but the Canadian model makes more sense. The US and Canada are federations where provinces/states have a fair bit of autonomy over their own affairs. That said, Canada is even more de-centralized that the US and more closely resembles a federation of countries than the US. Canada didn't even achieve free trade between its provinces till 2017. European countries have been independent, in some cases, for centuries. The US model doesn't offer enough de-centralization.
"Canada didn't even achieve free trade between its provinces till 2017" - could you please give a source or a pointer for further research on this? I am not familiar with Canada, I find the fact you mentioned very interesting.
I love how the video is over 20 minutes. This is something I listen to while driving and longer the better. Also very organized, good thesis and effective info delivery.
Taking over the global manufacturing industry and increasing scientific output while secretly building a global military industrial complex can be called the diplomatic tree, sure
Yeah germany, you couleve just gone with influence and diplomatic ideas and play the long game plus a military to fight minor wars for the slow game, remember to keep your offensive and quality ideas as well as innovative economic trade and administrative ideas, though always find a spot for quantity ideas, youll need em especially for the production quotas policy(lol)
This diplomatic approach would only work in current time period when peace has been achieved for a couple generations, world has globalized and most military spending in Europe has be neutered.
@@Cecilia-ky3uw Yeah, the trick is creating a new military doctrine, producing thousands of vehicles based on Revolutionary late war concepts most people never heard about and letting the whole world measure the strenght on outdated tanks and aircraft
I definitely feel a USE could happen soon between the french Luxembourg’s Belgians Dutch and Germans and it slowly integrate new members. There should still be a EU for members who don’t wish to be part of the USE though. As the USE being a member of the EU as a sovereign state.
this is probably the most realistic outcome. While still extremely powerful, its not as 'intrusive' as a full on all of europe USE or FRE(Federal Republic of Europe)
That is a stupid idea... Non of those countries speak the same languages... Never mind their beliefs and ideas. I mean see what is going on in the United States of America... They are falling apart. Less government is always mush better than more government. More efficient, more cost effective more workable, easier to implement. By the way when you dilute everything... You will not be able to find potency... You will be trapped in a colorless monotone word.
I don´t think so. in teh five members zou give, the 3 smallest are fiscal paradise that live of the 2 others ... no chance they find a common ground on fiscal topics France and germany have 2 opposite views on military, they will not find soon a common way forward These are some of the main task of a governement, without that there is not a lot a part from economy, where EU as it is already does the job.
No nation in the eastern EU will ever agree to this. Nations like Poland, Czhechia, Grece, Slovenia, Croatia, Hungary and my own nation Slovakia had fought for their independence for centuries. Agreeing to this would undo all eforts and meanig of these strugels. If the United states of Europe will ever be created, it would be without all the EU menbers east to germany.
Not be the lawyer of the devil but the ones that actually matters to be a global power are all to the west or south of germany, for economic, military or strategic geographical location.
Do you really believe that you are fully sovereign? You got the Euro, hans no independent monetary politic, all money questions are decided with majority voting in ECB. There will be minimum corporate tax level in EU and USA (already agreed). So no competitive advantage on taxes for you. Wonder what would be difference if we have federal layer above national governments. Even today most of the European economic issues are dealt at Council of Ministers in Brussels. Would it be so bad to speak with one voice against Russians and Chinese? See now how China treat Lithuania.
@@slavzahariev3901 One of the main reasons why did Slovakia join EU was that we were in bad economic state. This economic problems were mainly caused by split of Czhechoslovakia wich was it self caused by strugle to agree how was Czhechoslovakia supposed to funcion, Czechs wanted a centralized, united state and we Slovaks wanted to govern our nation autonomously and have equal say in the goverment, despite being economically, politicly and numaricly inferior to czhechs. Eventualy we realised that an agreement was impossible and we split. We have chosen independence and soverenity over better economic stability and greater military protecion. Same Logic aplyes here.
@@slavzahariev3901 The "unified voice" they would be speaking with, would be that of Brussels, or Paris or Berlin, don't for a second think that the rest of us would have any real say on matters of such magnitude. I will assume that you are Bulgarian, based on the name and ask you to think about the great pressure that is being exerted on Bulgaria recently, for having a stance of its own, on the issue of the acceptance of N. Macedonia to the union, which issue is of national significance to the country and its people, and yet it is being bullied both by the EU and US into lifting its veto. Why would we believe that the people of Bulgaria, Romania or any other smaller nation would at all be relevant in the formation of a "common voice" of a unified EU state where they would be mere stateless minorities, when even the EU of today is so quick to exercise soft power on actual sovereign countries in order to shift their policy?
Germany ww1: taking europe by conquest. Germany ww2: taking europe by conquest. Germany 2022: taking europe by making friends :). Germany, the redemption arc.
If you think Germany is making friends in the east by budying up to Russia...well...you've never been to the east have you. I don't know how to express the Balkin or Polish distrust in strong enough terms.
Germany didn’t started WW1 they weren’t the agresor. WW1 doesn’t have any specific aggressor like WW2 all countries was guilty but If you want some to blame for WW1 you can blame Serbia or Russia. And BTW EU isn’t anything like the 4 Reich EU isn‘t control by Germany it is control by every member state equal and I think that the leader isn’t now Germany but France
@@David-kn4hb I actually blame them less for WW2 than WW1. Kiser Wilhelm could have stopped WW1 all on his own in several ways. 1.) Don't break the treaty with Russia and Austria that delineated everyone's sphere of influence and mutual security. I don't care if you think that your blood relationship with other monarchs makes war impossible, that's a stupid thing to think. European history is the history of closely related nobles stabbing each other for god, land, cash, or because they had a dream that told them to. Whatever really. or 2.) Don't get in an Arms race with England AND France at the same time. The English and French are ancient enemies. Pick a side and build to supplement their weakness. Don't build to threaten both world powers at the same time and then be surprised when they squash you. If Iran decides its going to build to destroy China and the US simultaneously tomorrow what do you think happens to Iran? or 3.) Insist on power neutrality instead of punitive campaigns with negligible economic or military benefit. Staying neutral to enforce on Russian neutrality with the French and British helps Austria more than putting soldiers in Serbia. And if Austria can't beat Serbia on its own there is a good chance that it is not worth the risk of war anyways. Also, stop insulting Italy for no reason. 2nd tier powers aren't allowed to be picky about their allies. These and other stupidly obvious calculations that don't require hind sight can be found in your basic common sense.
I don't see a USE happening anytime soon. Too big are the gaps between countries, economically, socially, education-wise, language wise etc. In fact, language is the most important issue. However, we might see intermediary steps like a stronger union between France, Netherlands, Belgium and Germany and/or Germany and Austria. Maybe as a "EU 2.0". But we'll see.
I think a Super State in Europe would be a bad Idea. Europe is nice because her diversity, each country has a unique culture, unique history. With Centralization and Unification. Europe would became into another China. A Boring Gigantic Country. And probably authoritarism will be necessary to control the huge population.
no it was all planned and the german people and the government are 2 different peoples. you just dont know it yet. they say they are german but are not. hope this helps. hence why the 2nd war took place. the players had it planned before and came back after. they were conquered a long time ago. merkel was trained kgb and has no love for the germans because she is not one of them.
New World order ain't far away :/ Polarisation of the people, mass disinformation. Overrepresentation of an ethnic group on both sides of the ukr Russ war. History's repeating :(
National identity is more than ´fear and hatred´, it is also love, trust and the glue which allows our democracies to flourish. Ask yourself how well the US democracy would function without the american national identity holding it all together.
Well, how well does the US democracy function? In my opinion, federation just concentrates power in fewer hands and makes it more vulnerable to corruption. Maybe the US would function better as a group of smaller states working together rather than as a giant country.
@@Jonassoe that’s the exact opposite of what a federation does, what your describing is nearly a Unitarian system. Federation decentralizes power, and America does it as much as possible. Each level of government takes on different roles in America Local, state, and federal. The individual state alone is highly autonomous and basically acts like it’s own country making the US act more like a confederation of bickering states with lots of power rather than a federation. At the end of the day however the federal government has the most power.
Thats not what a federation is, in a federation each states is able to keep its autonomy and identity. There is also a european identity, something all europeans have and some feel it more than others.
This is the EU's long term plan, and it's been slowly moving towards it for decades. The biggest step was the currency, as it is very hard for countries to walk away once they are in the Eurozone. Just recently we have seen another huge step, the EU borrowing money for the first time, and immediately using that money as leverage over member states. That power won't be a one off, as that's the way the EU develops, waiting patiently for an opportunity to expand its role, and hold tight to its gains. There will be no grand transformation, they learnt that with the EU Constitution, the public wouldn't buy it, so we got the Lisbon treaty, same thing different wrapper. So EU citizens will never get a one off do you want a federal Europe question, it will just emerge, bit by bit. There is incidentally a lesson in the US for those saying Union prevents wars, civil wars can still happen.
I do believe it is in Europe's interest to develop a USE though. As it is now, we are a rich playground for foreign powers like russia, china and the US. I think it will soon be time to finally truly unify Europe and let it spread its wings. No more stupid infighting over nothing, no more politics propagated by foreign money, and no more dependence on foreign businesses for critical infrastructure. Let there be a European government for a European people. With a European army and European political parties.
@@itselevenfiftyfive3833 my thoughts exactly, if only our leaders had the ability to see past trivialities like "losing their national pride" and embrace an EU identity, then we would not be such an inactive, indecisive, and divided economic and political block. We could truly rival the US and China in terms of economic strength.. but noooo, muh identity..
@@ConfusedPlushiee Not just Countries: Anual Revenue 2020: in 1.000.000 (M) for selected companies: GM 122.485 M$ Microsoft: 143.015 M$ Exxon 181.502 M$ VW 222.900 M€ Google: 256.740 M$ Apple 294.130 M$ Amazon 386.060 M$ Now compare this to the GDP of some of the smaller EU members: Austria: 403.370 M€ Denmark 334.562 M€ Finland 252.934 M€ ,,, and more than 15 even weaker EU Members, the smallest being: Malta 14.859 M€ If you combine the internet giants MS, Google & Amazon you are at 823.000 M$ with would afford you the GDP of one of Poland, Sweden or Belgium. Combine all mentioned companies together, and you buy the work of all of Spain, or a third of Germany. Small countries don't stand a chance in hell against giants like these. And the giants know it, and don't have any qualms about using it for their purpose.
The most feasible way to achieve the USE is to effectively merge the states that want it into the current Union and become full-fledged EU states, so the EU would have fewer members but the unified would have more representation (the sum of the unified ), and over the years, the rest of the states that want this would join. In this way the Federation is optional, so membership is voluntary, the current Union remains standing, and the advantages of federalization would be seen in the power pole it forms in the Union. The EU will be like the "Partnership for Peace" program for NATO and the USE will be like it is NATO. So there is a place for everybody, if you want to be part of the EU program you have the EU, if you want a greater integration you have the USE. The only difference between EU and USE is that once you unite with the Federation you can't separate anymore, it's a one way trip.
This plan could work, but only wirh Russion approval. Germany is deeply depended on Russia, and other EU nations are depended on Germany. Connection of German and Russian interests are crucial.
As a first step I think including all countries wouldn't work anyway. What makes more sense is to make it a voluntary (con)federation with more nations joining in when they feel a need to and are ready while still upholding the EU as it is as a placeholder for countries who don't want that kind of integration.
Yeah, as a citizen of small EU country we would simply be absorbed into bigger nations culture loosing everything that makes us who we are. Not to mention control over our own area.
@@hypegamer2362 No we wouldn't. We would have the exact same amount of control and only the corrupt politicians would lose control. It doesn't matter who is in charge as long as we have the voting power. We could have an alien representing us in the government for as long as he does what the people want. Besides, where is our culture going to disappear? This is an idea for a united military, economic and HEALTH SYSTEM federation. I can only see benefits here as corona has proved how giving every single speck on the world map a separate health system just halts the progress of vaccination.
@@demran17 what makes you think that corrupt politicians will arise in the presumably richest, 2nd strongest and 3rd most populous country on earth with over 400 million voters? Is the current EU counsel corrupt in your opinion? Is Merkel?
@@zzap4922 Cultures form through borders. Your culture would slowly disintegrate within a larger super country and be supplanted by a new pan European culture.
Switzerland would still have a neighbouring country besides th EU (Lichtenstein). Andorra, San Marino and the Vatican would be the only contenders for that part. San Marino and Andorra are even mountainous than Switzerland.
@@TFAric Let's discuss this issue. You say, that it would be a great loss for smaller countries to unite to bigger entity right? From the perspective of the future: What is more suitable for governing the world? Let's see hypothetical examples, exxagurated of course. 1.A lot of small nations in the world, no big entities, with its own interrests and very small individual impact. It would be very hard to agree on something. A lot of nations are going to fight each other because of opposite interests. 2. 4-5 entities for whole world, that are competing with each other, which could be a good thing unless war starts or they will harm each other somehow (China, USA, Russia, USE, India). 3. Big entity of Mankind, that have one goal, no wars, one language, (one religion???). It can regulate itself very easily, solve global warming and other existential treaths like nothing. Just imagine the resources available for innovation instead of wars. Ressources available for very big projects, that could make life multiplanetary species. But what if the governor of the world would be bad? Would the whole world suck?
Except; it is a very bad idea if done just to please you. We are already tired of the changes that the EU has had so far. We have no willingness to lose any more for the benefit of others. And we don’t want any new Hintler to lead us. We would like to get rid of the current leaders as well. Greatness would not help it.
@@TFAric I mean why would anyone want to create a nation , don't they realize that the smaller cities will get swallowed and loose all sovereignity , they loose so much.
@@damian4926 gt / bt It also has cooperation with Russian-language channels. Sometimes it is worth looking for and reading opinionated people from Russia.
There's a political party called "Volt" that has a party in every member state (Volt Deutschland (Germany), Volt Netherlands, etc.). The goal of that party is to create exactly this - a federal European state.
It will probably never happen because Europe is not a nation its a region. A Polish person and a Portuguese do not consider themselves the same people group.
@@muffinman5741 That’s crazy to me. How will city states work? Like, they work when they are very few and protected by the bigger states like Monaco aso. but for a whole continent? While Russia chuckles in the background? How is that going to work?
@@Arcaryon Well, Hamburg is a city state that's also a member of the Federal Republic of Germany. That's the solution: city states are fine as long as they're protected as a part of a bigger federation (hint: EU). Probably not what that person meant though.😂
The "U S of E" has been the dream of progressive European leaders for decades. As an American working on the continent the last thirty years I've seen a slow defiant acceptance and integration of member states. Events I thought would weaken the Union, like Brexit, the numerous budget crises, and Russia's belligerence, have only strengthened their relationship. While economic coordination has certainly benefitted, foreign policy has only recently been consistent. Perhaps the greatest challenge to a US of E is pride of heritage of member cultures and social differences between north and south.
I see lots of dreamers in the comments but lets take a look at it realistically: 1. Is Germany, France or any other European state is going to give up their national interest for a "greater good of the union"? I don't think so. Germans could easily stop Nord Streams and the energy crisis would never happen, also the Russians would have no leverage in Europe, yet they went for their national interest, not the union interest. Same goes for every other state in Europe. I somehow cannot imagine France giving up nuclear energy if that means greater good for the Europe. 2. What will be the union's official language? I somehow cannot imagine people using 26 languages and no one will agree to root out their mother language and exchange it with English. Especially the French. 3. Federal union state means there will be only two parties: French and Germans - just like Democrats and Republicans in the USA. Why? Cuz they have the biggest populations. This means that either one or the other will be in power and nobody else. They will decide what's good and what's not for the other states. Why would for example Ireland let the French and Germans decide what is good for them. Most French and Germans don't even know where Ireland is on the map. What if Germans and French will decide that Ireland cannot have low taxation (what have brought her wealth) and must change its economics, meaning it must get poor. Why would Irish let them decide on that? Even if this thing will happen, it will break apart immediately. This is impossible to hold for a longer period, nobody will simply give up their interest for a "greater good" and nobody really feel a unity. A Portuguese man might say that he "feels European and connected to other Europeans", but is he gonna go to war against Russia if Poland will be attacked? I doubt. He will immediately stop feeling European, he will start looking at his country's interest and his country's interest will be to not go to war with Russia over Poland, its that simple. That is not the case with US. A guy from California might not like a guy from Texas, but if there would be a war with Mexico a guy from California would have no problem with giving his life over Texas. This is the fundamental reason why the United Europe is impossible. As long as we are not ready to die for each other, the thing is just not gonna happen.
The only way it could remotely have a chance of working in regards to France and Germany dominating it at elections. Would be to break up France and Germany inside the EU and have federated EU states such as Normandy or a bavaria but even then they might still vote as ethnic blocks instead of national ones making it pointless.
''Most French and Germans don't even know where Ireland is on the map. What if Germans and French will decide that Ireland cannot have low taxation (what have brought her wealth) and must change its economics, meaning it must get poor. Why would Irish let them decide on that? '' First off, we're not Americans, i can easily name every country in europe + it's location and 99.9% of Germans will know where Ireland is located. also Ireland without low taxation would be poor? their economy would change, ok but that doesn't mean they would become poor, surely Ireland is not a little tax haven that has nothing else going for them. it's known that there economy is artificially blown up by tax inversion practices, ''In July 2017, the Irish Central Statistics Office (CSO) warned that tax inversions to Ireland artificially inflated Ireland's GDP data (e.g. without providing any Irish tax revenue''. Currently Irelands GDP per capita is at around 95k USD, while most of Western Europe is at 50-60k USD.
why should anybody give up nuclear energy? it was just declared as a green energy by the EU. i hope germany joins the nuclear movement. other green parties already made clear that they were in error with their stance. you want to save the planet? build nuclear / fusion / thorium plants. thats the most safe bet. everything else is a very risky bet.
Im from spain and we also have monarquia like other countries in Europe. There are so many problems to solve, im pro European but i dont even know if i would support this idea. Its so complex
Not really. For the United States of Europe only three things are missing at this point. An official Constitution, now called the treaties, and, the key change, the election of the commission by the parliament not by both chambers as well as the EU-army has to be solved. That is all.
there's always the option of reunification with former spanish territories. This may benefit spain more than accepting the german proposal because the EU only serves german interests, making other countries industries weak. germany does sponsor separatist movements as well as leftist parties. PSOE received funds from SPD as an example, germany is the real enemy.
You don't have to join the EU to be pro-European? What is that even suppose to mean? That we collaborate more? Fine! But most countries have national pride and don't want their country to be abolished. You guys keep amazing me, because you havent learned from history. Time and time again, bigger empires fell, because smaller countries wanted their nationality back. Bigger is not always better. Colbbaroration. Yes. Giving up sovereignty? No!
@@TheDoctorIWho if only politics were that easy, you cant just put a ton of cultures in 1 country and call it a day, especially not after they were seovereign for hundreds to thousands of years
There would have to be a lot of federalism. The central government can't have too much authority since their decision affect such a massive amount of people
@@jv-lk7bc The population is an extra 35% more people than in the US so it's also closer to half the amount of people that live in India or China. Plus there's a lot of different "cultures" and identities to an extent that can't be found in the US, China or India
@@maaax1173 Most of Europe is comprised of people preferring christian (heavily pushed in Poland) or more modern progressive values (a large portion of most developed Europe) under somewhat democratic leaderships, only recent immigration crisis divided nations in answering the question on how to deal with a mess many EU countries had nothing to do with. What food they eat, the music they listen to or the language they speak doesn't really matter because these hardly are kinds of differences to leave the EU for... Most of the differences that some perceive were artificially created by nationalist movements to prevent brain drain or instill patriotism to feed meat grinder in case of next war, there is not that much difference in European people from East to West in terms of their values, which you would find if you actually visited multiple EU countries, people from west to east wants same human rights and have similar priorities, just politicians like in Poland or Hungary are sometimes bit overenthusiastic in making their countries different to avoid unpopular EU policies (immigration). Further interference with foreign countries which larger EU countries did for decades and which ended miserably for the EU last decade will be the prime reason why not to give the EU more central power or even leave the EU by EU nations that were itself under oppression in the past, do not have any empire people superiority complex and want nothing to do with such behavior. If giving more power to EU leadership in Brussel means to become just another US or Russia overthrowing governments left and right as it suits EU geopolitical goals, EU consolidation of power will fail miserably and the whole union will fall apart rather soon even without an economic crisis because even if many Europeans wish stronger Europe I hardly know anyone who wants EU to replace the US as the world cleaner and leader in citizens bugging in order to enforce public support for rather shady policies, and rest assured that nationalists within EU nations will fully exploit such colonial behavior for gaining public support to get the hell out of yet another emerging empire...
Honestly, it's pretty rare in recent history for countries to voluntarily unite into a single sovereign state, in general, and in most examples, either all but maybe one of the states that merged had only existed for a short time, or the union itself only existed for a short time before breaking up.
Countries used to band together more often for protection since small countries ended up getting dominated even if they werent conquered. Modern politics makes direct control or invasion difficult if not impossible so it incentivizes autonomy more. The fact voters are capricious and politicians will make rash decisions to try and appease them short term doesnt help either, just look at Brexit. It took the UK decades to help build the EU starting just after WW2 through to the 2010s, around 70 years of work, and they threw it all away in a matter of months after a single snap election. Scotland has been part of the UK for centuries and nearly broke off a few years ago. These unions take forever to build but can be thrown away almost instantly on a whim.
England asked to become part of Scotland, thereby becoming the UK. That partnership has lasted many hundreds of years, and has solely begun to fragment due to the absurd decisions of a single political party during the previous few decades. As somebody that has interacted with many Scottish soldiers of the UK, I am confident that continuation of its union is very probable.
@@arthas640 As for banding together for protection, we have some alliances like NATO, which don't require total political union, though it is true that our modern system where countries are bigger and have more citizen support than they used to (be) in many places, and where the UN outlaws most aggression and you need a nuclear superpower on your side to get away with it, but those superpowers can't directly fight each other, has probably reduced the extent to which countries are looking for protection. Also, the "protection" part of "protectorates" (historical ones are now often equated with "colonies"), should not be completely ignored, even if it was probably protection from other colonial powers, or even the same one they became "protected" by, not to mention more direct methods of inducement, that lead to these arrangements being accepted by the countries that became protectorates.
For a US of Europe, I did not hear the creation of a popularly elected head of state, or of an elected legislative body. The EU is now governed by bureaucrats appointed by each nation. EU governance reflects the will of ruling parties, but no of the people of Europe. That is a confederation, NOT a federation. The US tried that under our "Articles of Confederation" from 1781, to 1788. It failed, and we created a new Constitution to establish our current form of government. Europe need not repeat our mistake.
A federated Europe needs to become a parliamentary democracy, not a presidential democracy. An empowered, directly elected head of state offers no benefits other than inviting populism and increasing the risk of dictatorship.
YES. This is exactly my point. Europe needs to swallow their pride and learn from our mistakes. We screwed up several hundred years ago, now they don’t have to. But imma guess they’re not going to and will make the same damn mistakes we did. History repeats itself.
@@fds7476 A federated republic --- parliamentary or presidential??? Which would be better. They both have advantages and disadvantages. IMO, one is not inherently better.
Eh, these kinds of things take time. You don’t immediately get to a federal Europe, if that even becomes the decided path, France for instance is, after all, a centralized state. Basically, it’s a question of direction. Do we keep begging America to keep protecting us against better knowledge OR start to prepare for the inevitable and also because some of us actually just happen to care for each other.
@@Arcaryon Sounded like a plan, a quite superficial unification attempt based on banking economic incentive. Fact is all empires fall, the bigger it is the harder it falls, that being said there is a way it can be done right thus setting up for longer lasting infrastructure BUT oddly they seem to be doing things quite damagingly and superficially which is harming that cause. So You are right it takes a long time but to them a pump & dump isn't worth such a investment.
@@hottake4605 I mean, the banking system is just one part of the puzzle. But listing all the issues about the EU just takes too much time so I usually reduce myself to "reforms of the political side of the EU as well as reforms of the whole European financial & economical system". The debt & banking issue is a useful example imo. because it’s easy to understand and even easier to criticize in a political setting. I think that the main reason why some empires deteriorate is corruption that leads to economic hardship and inner turmoil mixed with unfortunate circumstances. Looking to Rome as a sort of example, a big part of the question is how to even get to a point where the EU itself starts to be able to carry its own momentum and then it just becomes about keeping that momentum going. Because I have come to think that the biggest factor in human life is the state of the economy, I am convinced that most issues the EU has can only be fixed on the drawing bord of the core financial & economic theory of the entire thing. While I am talented enough to recognize these flaws, I am not educated enough to find solutions to them because in the end, we are really talking about redefining large aspects of fundamental principles that go beyond what one can figure out after a simple university education. The political side of things is imo. much easier to fix. Just happens to take a ton of time.
The recent russian invasion of Ukraine could be the motivating reason for the average European. We even saw Germany axe the nord stream 2 pipeline for example and radically increase military spending. Crazy times
Have you forgotten about NATO? You don't need to give up your sovereignty, autonomy and any fundamental liberties for security. Under article 5 of the NATO accords an attack on one is an attack on all. Russia wouldn't dare to attack NATO countries. Even if they should be so bold to attack NATO, then all that means is that forming the USE would not of prevented it.
@@newnoise95 No I have not, and you are right, it is not necessary to make a super state in order to defend against russia, but that’s not the point. The point is the invasion of Ukraine can be a unifying force
@@monkeeseemonkeedoo3745 Unifying force for who and for what? Europe was once predominately all Catholic nations and the protestant reformation shattered that unity, becoming one of the most bloody events in European history. Europe is also the place of the time of the French revolution where the French people rose up and killed their king, their nobility, and anyone else who did not agree with the Jacobin's. Don't be so arrogant to think that having the same flag will prevent civil wars or violent revolutions to overthrow the status quo. Because that's mostly what history writes of.
@@newnoise95 It can be a unifying force for the EU. The video makes a really good point at around 19:40 onwards, that "equality in a super power competition with the US and China is too abstract an argument for the average European for the rejection of sovereign rights". There are also the distinct national identities that have formed, with past rivalries, that make unification more difficult. The interesting thing to me is that invasion of Ukraine, and the striking and horrendous atrocities that come with it, can be a powerful tool in crafting an 'us' vs 'them' dynamic, which can be harnessed by the political leaders and proponents of a US of Europe. The entire thing is a catalyst. As for whether a US of Europe would end conflict, I don't believe that at all. Either way I don't really have a horse in this race, at least not the way someone living in Europe would.
This is why we should not have enlarge EU to the east. Eastern country are ennemies of europe, they want to stay with USA even if it's against our interrest, we spent a ton of money to rebuilt their economy from scratch after the fall of USSR, most of our industries went there because their workers are paid less and we can't compete with that in a free market, and the cherry on the cake : now they are questionning our values of democracy and freedom (Poland, Hungary, I'm looking at you). At one point F off, eastern europe in EU has been nothing but pain in the ass for us, I'm sorry but it's true.
@@Kafei01 Western Europe could not look idly at the markets of Central and Eastern Europe. They thought that when we welcomed us, we would be silent and not claim our rights ... and here are such things. Who are you looking at there, nobody here is interested :)
Many industrial jobs of Western Europe were always going to be lost. Eastern Europe allowed those jobs to stay in Europe. In what way is 'staying with the US' against Western European interest? There is nothing stopping Western European nations from leaving NATO.
@@calc1657 An extremely idiotic attitude to have with such a serious issue as this. It wouldn't have mattered if they were formal, because the US breaks any treaty they feel like. The short simple version of this is... missile systems in Ukraine or Finland means war. Its that simple... no ifs, buts, maybe's... that is the red line the Russians cannot retreat from. I wonder what happened when the roles were reversed and Russia wanted to put missiles on Cuba... oh, thats right.. the US threatened war and put up a blocade....
Well they tried it twice, got partitioned, lost most of East Germany with most if not all populations resettled. Then they calmed down until the next big group think called EU and Euro. They're not too comfortable with apologising to Greece, Italy, France, Belgium, most of Scandinavia, Poland, Russia, Czech and Slovakia and errmmm Spain for their heaps of belligerence. It makes for awkward after dinner conversations, however they have come a long way. I don't think Germany takes to the idea of a Federated Europe that swallows their country whole again, because the ECB was a hard sell. Plus Kohl isn't around anymore. They are now a pragmatic people, bean counters and beavers really doing their own thing. Secretly they would rather be Best Friends Forever with the Brits and Americans than having to deal with the little Napoleons constantly mushrooming in Paris. Plus it's a pain in the proverbial having to deal with Southern European Countries.
Quasi-Confederate States of Europe can inherit France’s seat in UN Permanent Security Council. However member states won’t likely want to give up their "national" representation in United Nations and OECD. I believe the EU must go through a complete overhaul and offer different levels of membership in order to achieve the goal of ‘Greater Europe’ in this century. Members in the inner circle can take advantage of full common market and unrestricted access for their citizens while countries in outer circle can take advantage of customs union, joint monetary policy and mutual defence agreements.
Stop right there man, France's seat will never leave the hand of the french president. We will never allow it. We are willing to use the veto power for a friend if needed, but giving up our seat entirely will not happen forget it.
Effectively u are kicking several full member states to EEA/EFTA arrangements The problem is the balance would shift towards those on the EFTA and EEA but not full fledged member with more member states there As the relative size of the economy of those on the EFTA grows its hard to justify the current arrangements where EFTA pays contribution just takes all the rules made by the full EU member states with no say on it
I remain heartbroken that Brexit was allowed to take away the European citizenship I have enjoyed almost all my adult life. Can't wait for unification under a federation and hope that before I die, Britain will be back within the fold, this time with a proper constitution of its own to put an end to the power of the landed gentry and financiers that oppress us. One can dream - 'Imagine' as John Lennon said.
Well, we still love you here over on the other side of that tiny sliver of sea. Come and visit anyway, EU is not just about politics and economy, the most important part is to connect people! And one day you all might change your mind :) We wont hold grudges.
@ValentineF Die USA besteht auch aus 50 Staaten, wo einige größer sind als Deutschland. Du hast schon recht das Deutschland ein föderales Land ist, wir stehen aber trotzdem alle hinter einer Gemeinsamen Regierung, ob jetzt wer in Niedersachsen oder Bayern wohnt. Was ich damit sagen wollte, ist dass ich mir einfach ein vereinteres Europa wünsche, die EU hat schon in diesen Fall gute Arbeit geleistet.
The Holy Roman Reich as a model for the United States of Europe? Great idea because the Holy Roman Reich actually fell apart into many German dwarf states shortly after it was founded. Truly a great role model!
I still think a "United States of Europe" is pretty unlikely, but the russian war against Ukraine has changed the playingfield quite a bit in favor of stronger european cooperation. Especially the german policy changes regarding energy and defence are pretty monumental.
Especially with German rearmament, the Germans having the largest economy and military may again be the reality soon, this time wielding words rather than swords to unite Europe.
Honestly i think if something like a United European Federation would happen, it would only be with a few memebers. Probaly France, Germany and the Benelux States. Which would make Economicly a lot more sense and would be more Feasible considering that these Governments already have good relation's and are All Economiy Power houses
I agree. I don't see states like Hungary in a European state. They just elected Orban with a overwhelming majority of 65% for another term. They don't want Europe. They want authoritarianism, Russian influences and Europes money.
While this is the most relastic, and I would be for it, considering that Belgium doesn't have a government over years now kinda shows why this will take decades
@@ashardalondragnipurake Isn't it unstable because the french Part would rather be Part of France the dutch Part would rather be Part of the Netherlands? I mean the Federation would kinda do that in a sense
If France and Germany really want to federalize the union the best way would be by merging the two countries together into a Franco-German Federation and testing the model that they want to implement. If the union is succesfull other nations will want to join and those that keep reticent could be convinced to join if the franco-germans threaten to leave the EU. Then maybe countries like Hungary, Poland, even Italy and the Nordic Countries would choose to leave, but I don't think that Spain, Portugal, Benelux, Greece and Cyprus would have much of a choice other than accept the union.
I partly agree and disagree, I don't think it's going to be a positive sign if it's just Germany and France, other nations should also get the chance to join into this idea and many but not all will do so, there is a policy method called ''multispeed European intergration"' which is each member state chooses it's own method of intergration and gets placed in a rank of sorts on how far they are intergrated, most of western Europe and parts of Northern Europe are already largely intergrated, same rule of law, mostly same culture, close relations with member states but others like parts of Eastern Europe and Southern Europe might be more reserved due to history or specific national interests that clash with European interests which might mean they want less full intergration. while that might not be optimal it would give a gradual transformation of the EU and can actually do something for the member states that would benefit them and thus promote further intergration into a wider European Federation, it's probably the best move forward and can iron out the issues faster for each new state that wishes to join.
@R well the alternative is leaving the block or being seen as less important for EU wide policies since they aren't willing to put in the effort, you can say it's unfair and perhaps it is but likewise us being blocked by smaller member states is also unfair so at some point it has to move forward and you can join or not join but effects will happen and they can be positive or negative. Mercenary approach is a bit unfair, they aren't trying to become a federation for economic reasons just to make money, it's a national security issue for all member states and long term growth for a world that's hyper competitive, stagnation means death and Europe has stagnated for quite some time, if it does not bend, it will break that's the way I see it.
@R I think it's not wrong to see it that way, although in the end it unfortunately comes down to a manner of how it is presented. If France and Germany were to say you have to join or go under, that would be mercenary, and quite frankly I don't see the point of forcing someone to work together, that never leads to positive outcomes, I'd prefer if people wish to have closer cooperation for mutual benefit. On the other hand however, if some powers of Europe wish to unify, and in turn the ones that simply don't see the benefit of closer cooperation and integration wish to remain as they are, then being treated as a normal third country like the UK would be quite normal. Unfortunately both sides have their fair points, after all the ones who integrate further do it because they see a benefit in it. It would then be normal that a country that decides against joining, and believes itself to be in a stronger position to become less important to the Union than those who are actual members of it, it's natural, just like the actual areas and states within a country matter to that country much more than anything outside of it.
@@iyouweGAME The EU is controlled in Brussels. Its power is distributed over all of its members. And it was France who pushed for this solution in the first place, not Germany.
As a Swede, I don't see this happening in my lifetime. Yes, the EU needs to get stronger and be able to compete with the other superpowers, but I will never abandon my country.
Being Irish, I can't see us giving up our veto. The threat remove us if we don't agree is empty and lazy. If a state could have been forced out, Greece would not be with us right now. Instead most EU officials and advocates are afraid the EU will shatter. That has been an underlying theme in Brexit.
EU is already a confederation. We just need an army, fiscal union, and an official Constitution to basically be a state. We don't need UES because we are different from USA. Like we don't need a PM and president. A confederation with a council made out of leaders from each member state works just fine. The Union just needs to be strengthened.
Not quite there yet. Each EU country can still act independently militarily. Not only that, the US can still call on individual EU nations for military assistance or interventions. This is an example of the weak centralized aspect of the current EU. It won't work as long as each nation can still exercise international relationships on their own, the same way the USA can't work if each member state can have their own relationships with China or Russia. The first step to centralize the decision-making structure is to take away each member-state's military power and diverge it to one main central body, then reestablish it so that each member can still maintain an army(similar to the US national guard) but with the main command at the hands of the central government. The reason behind this is that a centralize government means nothing if each region/nation/state can still maintain their own personal armies as shown in China's warlord period pre-ww2 and in the Sengoku Period of Japan. There are even more examples of this as witnessed throughout history.
@@chrisdechristophe Is hard to have a central government when we are made out of nations with different languages, cultures, and religions. Who will be in charge, and why would the people in one country accept a president that is foreign to them? That is why a structure similar to what we have today in the Council and Commission is good, it just needs more power. We can give the council control over more important aspects, such as economy, defense, laws, etc. Instead of an elected president or PM, we can keep going with a rotative presidency of 6 months. And have the national governments have a degree of autonomy, on less important elements. Instead of local Presidents, we could have governors like in US, and give the citizens the impression that they are still ruled by their own officials, while Bruxelles is in the end in charge... this would all have to keep going for another 20-30 years, untill the boomers are all dead, as the younger generation likes EU more than them. After that we can dream bigger.
From the places I've traveled to or lived in all around europe, I can totally say that the Swedes, the finnish and the danish would rather leave than be integrated And the baltics would love to join in into the USE Poland/Hungary, would rather leave and such aggressive attempt at unifcation would help them succeede Can't say anything for southern europe. Western europe would probably unite. But to be honest, I don't think this ever going to happen
I would guess that the financial situation in the southern states and France is a big issue that could lead to vetos of the Netherlands, Austria, Denmark, and maybe Germany too.
Finland is in the Schengen and in the core of the EU now, and the finnish policy is to belong to the core states even more so in the future. Finland is perhaps the most active present member also in the pursuit of the union defence forces and the unified foreign policy as well.
@xX DeadMemes Xx as our (German) chancellor said, righter a union (which even our own law does not allow) or leave... So you probably don't have to go to war (if nothing happens between EU and Russia).
@@vikkran401 , no it's not unpopular among the Nordic countries, quite the opposite especially now having had to listen to the British. More cooperation is good but not one country is for giving up on its independence in the union. This video is just stupid propaganda by idiots.
@@DS-fk7ed : well, good for them. They have worked for that and they understand the strategic importance of the unification. UNION is power and prosperity. Whom do you expect them to listen to ? To general public that knows nothing?
Brother this is not USA. Some of those coutries are on the map of Europe for 1000+ years, and that means that those countries have highly specific national identity. Even if this project happens that will be just changing the name. People wi still feel citizens of their own states.
No smaller country can afford to allow a centralised foreign policy. Greece would be at risk of being sold out by other Europeans whom are interested in appeasing Turkey. Poland would be at risk of being sold out to the russians so that Germany can get cheaper gas etc etc
@Tobias Reiner Your point re population is understood. However when we are talking about the population of Europe declining we are starting from a very high number to begin wirh, currently 448 million people. If that declines to 348 million, its still a large population.
Well-done report on an idea that still has traction. While the rise of a federal European state may be unlikely in the foreseeable future, visibility going forward is unusually poor right now. My sense is we a living on the cusp of a time of rapid transformation. In many ways, what was is no more, and what will be has yet to be determined.
As a Moroccan born in Spain, I hope this idea succeeds. Then, the North-African countries would probably follow. And in the middle East we could see, at last, how the countries remove the borders that they were imposed. And we could finally see the organic Middle East that should have happened after the end of the Ottoman Empire. 2 or 3 distinct cuntries, not 22 smaller, artificial and more managable puppet countries ruled by idiots...
These cosmopolitan dogs try to pour old wine in new bottles. This is nothing new. These people promise it is necessary and will lead to massive better life for you. But really, it will only improve their power and capitalist venture network. Haven't you learnt anything form the past? Your ancestry and heritage like for example: Catalonia, nationalities are nothing more than irrelevant rubbish to them. They don't care about you. Try talking wit a local politician and realise how far they are from reality.
The last sentence is important: "Germany's policy divides the union more than it unites it." Germany's self-loathing immigration policy turned out to be a mistake. They must find their self-esteem again.
The bad reputation of the Balkans originates from the west slavic nations. They are not part of the union. Greece has no territory disputes, neither does Bulgaria and Romania.
I mean, you might want to wait a bit as our current politicans are showing the world how not to manage a country and IMO the UK needs a revolution to rework the structure of our government to not be inherently corrupt even before people get involved... But as an Englishman I gotta say, I love the people of Malta and I'm proud of the friendship we share!
@@Neion8 Well, the further our alliance is afar from our shores, the more it is beneficial for both parties. Apart that having an alliance with mainland Europe can only erase the few commercial advantages that we have as small island nation.
@@yourealittlebitfat4344 The idea doesn’t seem bad, but what he did to get there was wrong. That’s like saying “FDR is a bad person because he killed thousands of innocent lives with two bombs because that’s what Stalin/Hitler would do” Everything’s morally grey. Comparing Germany now to Nazi Germany is like comparing 1990s Tetris to Call of Duty Warzone. They aren’t comparable at all. The only worry would be if Germany decided to militarize AND start asking for other nations to join by force. But that isn’t happening. They’re militarising because of Russia. They aren’t forcing anyone to join them. They aren’t invading anyone. Germany isn’t Nazi Germany anymore. Calm down
@@yourealittlebitfat4344 it's really not, yes Hitler wanted to unite Europe...under German rule, the EU gives voice to every country, sure Germany has the loudest voice being the biggest one but if France and any other EU member join their voice they have more power than Germany, also everyone from everywhere can be president, as of now the president is of Malta for example.
There is no such as "germany" anymore. Especially which is controlled by germnas. It's just a globalist property of a bunch of internationalists (aka bolsheviks)
Wow I know Mrs Brenda Lincoln . I met her at a conference in carlifornia 2019 where she introduced us his business strategy, she helped me cover my student loans
I think trading is easier with proper guidance, especially from a proffessional it really helps reduce the chances of running into losses. All thanks to Mrs Brenda Lincoln . She changed my life, I was able to pay off my mortgage
United Europe was proposed as early as in 15th century by Czech king George of Poděbrady (Jiří z Poděbrad). "He proposed a treaty among all Christian powers, with Hungary, Poland, Bohemia, Bavaria, France, and Italian states and its princes the founding members, but others, especially the Hispanic powers, joining later. The member states would pledge to settle all differences by exclusively peaceful means. There was to be a common parliament and other common institutions." (from Wikipedia)
Ironic how he was unable to foresee, that Christianity would divide Europe, rather than unite it, and that said division would lead to the worst war Europe had ever seen until then.
Since France and Germany went separated ways in the Early Middle Ages, European unity (which was previously the norm due to the Romans) seemed as a dream never again coming true. Now this giant historical loop could come to a close. It would be the right thing anyway to be able to compete with the superpowers like US, China and India as well as a rapidly developing Africa. Seems that the Earth will be dictated by large empires once again.
It wouldn't be the right thing. Especially not for lame reasons like power-politics. Pretty much the same argument opponents of the dissolution of the USSR made when it fell apart. The time of Empires was the 19th century and it didn't really work out.
"European unity (which was previously the norm due to the Romans)"...It was never "the norm" you're looking at 250 years at best of ENFORCED State control and Roman cultural influence which varied the further away one gets from the Med. Universal Roman Citizenship in europe wasn't even granted by the Romans until 212 AD with the Constitutio Antoninia. In 286 the empire was divided into east and west. That's just 74 years where people were nominally the "same". Guess which bit collapsed first? 🤣
@@Zeerich-yx9po That is true. The german people trace their lineage back directly to those tribes. But so do the French (in part) who are still named after the Franks. And the English who are descendants of the Angles and Saxons, two germanic tribes that were in Germany when Rome was around but then later invaded/settled Britain in the 5th to 7th century. So it would be wrong to call those early tribes 'german tribes'. They were as german as they were french, english or dutch etc
@@sblbb929 It is required to survive in the long-run. Internal struggles, slow decision making, ect. are constantly damaging the union. It only remains intact as long as benefits outweight its downsides and historically as long as its soft power projection wasn't considered a thread by the other big players, or wasn't targeted by them for other reasons. All of its major flaws are a result of its structure and its member states demand to keep their individual power, while handing limited power to the EU. And external threats are emerging on the horizon as well, even provoking some of the current internal struggles from the outside. In this state, the EU is to fragile to resist external "attacks". It's our choice, if we want to remain somewhat relevant on the globe or not.
Speaking as somebody who considers themselves just as European as I am Irish, I am seriously opposed to this idea for one simple reason: The people at the top are unelected... Before the press releases about the pandemic, I'd never even heard the name Ursula von der Leyen. Imagine the average US citizen not only having no say on who the POTUS is, but not even knowing their name. The American people would never stand for such secrecy and the European people are crazy for accepting the way it is now, never mind giving them even more power.
@Trump is the best Y'all been saying that for the last 50 years. Meanwhile EU's economy has overtaken the USA so keep hoping, hope is all you separatists have :)
@@DeutschlandMapping There is no other idea than that one besides for Germany and a few northern countries. Its easier and more realistic to have a mediteranean unification like Italy, Albania, Greece, Cyprus, Israel, even Egypt Algeria and Lybia ( Lybia if the central europeans + americans gtfo) , Croatia, France. Spain maybe but its a different story. it maybe looks weird to you but those countries are similar to each other than south europe to central and northern europe. On a sidenote european union should disband and go back to maximum 1989.
The Neo Holy Roman Empire and everyone gets taught latin as second language. Let's be honest hungary and poland would think this is an amazing just because of the word "Holy" in the name. but "Empire" not so much.
You made a mistake at the beginning of the video. This coalition is actually not the first three party coalition Germany had since WW2 as the first German government from 1949-1953 also contained 3 parties the CDU/CSU, FDP and the back then relevant DP. This was followed by a four-party-government containing the CDU, FDP, DP and a long forgotten German refugee party. This was followed by another three party coalition containing the CDU and FDV, which ended in 1957. While Germany only had two party coalitions on the national level since 1957, it definitely had them since WW2.
First CDU/CSU are seen as one party in a government and that is the first three party coalition for the government. Three party coalitions happened in the federal states yes, but not in the German government
@@Timothy001 Apart from the fact that members of the CSU will vehemently disagree I concede that I don't think of the previous coalition as a three-party-coalition. However the first German government after the war was made up of CDU/CSU, FDP and DP so if you consider CSU and CDU as one party in a coalition THAT was the other three party coalition. (And obviously if someone disagrees with CDU and CSU being considered as one in a coalition then obviously Germany has had a lot of three-party coalitions)
The fact is if Europe wants to hold any significant power in this modern age. They have to unionize. A nation of 70 million is nothing but a nation of 700 ? Then we talking. If India with it's 22 different national languages can be united under 1 country, why can't Europe ?
Because you share the same religion, culture, values and history. There may be different languages in India but you have other "ideas" you can rally around. European countries are divided in every single way. Most countries in Europe have fought throughout history to gain their own independence, most people would not be willing to give that up. We have different languages, values, religions and more importantly our economies are very different. It would be impossible for this to work, at least for now...
I cannot see a United States of Europe being achieved with the status quo. The UK asked for reforms and the EU refused and then were suprised when the UK left. Had the EU tried to reform Brexit might have been avoided. If the EU cannot learn to be flexible and accept it needs to change the EU will slowly die. The EU needs to fundamentally change before it can expect Europe to want to sign away their sovereignty.
Oh man this is really a wired view. I agree there will be no United states of Europe, but saying that the the UK left because it doesn't get its way is simply a way to say the UK thought it is something better. And the Eu changes a lot over time but on a decission of the majority.
It’s amazing just how much history can shape the national psyche of a country. After surrendering in WWII, the French are desperate to show some teeth and to have a leading role on the world stage, so are shouting out loud to try an restore hurt pride. After destroying most of Europe (twice!) and the memory of Naziism still looming in the background, the Germans are hypersensitive to conflict and want a “softly softly” approach. The Brits, who historically never listened to anyone and march to the beat of their own drum, don’t want to be in a position where France and Germany tell them what to do, so are out.
I saw that too. History role should never be undermined. History is the reason of a nation's acting on the world stage. And yup especially about the Brits part it was obvious. They even admitted that they had always Been amazing at doing their own thing on their own.
@@feister2869 There’s always been rivalry and competition throughout thousands of years between the Brits and the mainland Europeans. The islanders developed a different (Anglo-Saxon) mentality, whereas the mainlanders developed a continental mentality. That’s why they have always been at odds. UK spawned USA and are both Anglo-Saxon countries with the same language, similar cultures and similar laws, and so they find themselves agreeing on a lot of things.
I don’t think it would work. The USA has a hard time keeping the Union together and we speak a common language and have similar cultures across states. I can’t imagine a Greek citizen appreciating a British president.
@grass The US split in two and fought a huge civil war less than 200 years ago and there are plenty of separatist movements here. Cascadia, Northern California wanting to secede from southern and central California, the Texas Independence Movement, the Puerto Rican independence movement, Hawaiian autonomists, etc.
The EU is so far already a unique and new political construct. Certainly we can't just model it into one big nation state. Thus there should and wont ever be one person on top as president or whatsoever. So far we already have a complex split of powers between Council, Commission and Parliament. The Parliament needs strengthening though. Who knows what we can come up with? A commission with each state being represented as the top executive organ and rotating presidency? Why not?
To be honest. I’m pro this. We need to look past our disagreements and history. We need to look forward to a United bright future. We can create so much more if we unite.
Sentimentally, it's a great idea, but realistically, it would be a political nightmare. Each government trying to squeeze out as many benefits for themselves as possible, likely only united in name. The amount of times where states have willingly merged together is very few. Sure, it was usually successful, but their precedent for merging was that they were of the same, or similar, culture groups. They already had a united identity. States with many different cultural identities seriously struggle to get along. They will feud and constantly vie for superiority, or just attempt gaining independence. If there are any hard feelings between some of the cultures, there will be discrimination and terrorism. Same can be said on the religious front. States of different cultural identities and religions can take centuries to truly unify. Fortunately with the way the internet is, cultures and religions are constantly mingling and getting used to each other already, so it might not take quite that long.
I disagree with Fullbright's interpretation on the formation of the US. Each of those people-groups he mentioned were subsumed under WASP domination. Most of us give no thought at all to our ancestral identity.
Yes the 13 were part of English imperial colonies they held a majority of ethnic cohesive, cultural, socio - political, ideological and a immense list of commonalties that I can go on with from infrastructure to linguistical, architectures etc etc originating from British empire that tied the people together. Some immigrants were not but again they were entering into a assimilating process of systemic structure controlled by Anglos. There are not 13 colony but 44 Countries in Europe each with their own right to Self Sovereignty with distinct intricacies in the multi thousands of years. Macron was a banker the USE is another imperialist banker project, is interesting that England POUNDS and Swiss aren't in this that's one small anecdote. Another element is that the colonials left for a new life in the Americas and MOST of USA was uninhabited by them at this time they just on paper ''owned'' the land.
@@emperorarima3225 yes wasp is kind of a 20th century misnomer Maryland was founded English Catholics New York was Dutch Delaware originally Swedish and there was a big difference between Calvinist Yankees and high church Anglican Virginians. Either way most Europeans in the American colonies were from the Britian and Ireland north western France the Low countries and the Rhineland with a tiny minority of Swedes.mass migration from the rest of Europe didn’t come till the 19th century.
Yeah, that’s wrong. Most of us give no thought to our ancestry NOW. They used to. People used to identify more with their home state than with the country at large. The best example is Robert E Lee. Things only really changed because of World War 2.
@Pedro Abreu adapt or die meaning Portuguese must adapt or Portugal dies. the USE another Banking Mega structure Macron was a Banker then became the President adapt against that or Portugal and the Portuguese Dies.
@Pedro Abreu so true, China, Russia, or even the US could take on any individual country in Europe and probably conquer it. That’s a harsh reality, military superpowers are no joke, they have the power to conquer the world if they unite.
Because our ancestors before that fought to maintain our previous states and we were betrayed. We lost our great states like Rome, Holy Roman Empire, Carolingian Empire and Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth, we have had a far longer history of cooperative countries not single nation states.
There is considerable amusement among conservative Germans at that part of their compatriots who desperately want to be Europeans so that they no longer have to be Germans, because they suffer from the fixed idea of carrying around some obscure kind of original sin. In doing so, they overlook the fact that the other nations of Europe have far fewer problems with being Spanish, Polish, French or Greek first and Europeans second, and that their enthusiasm for the idea of living in a common state with the Germans is therefore far less than vice versa. Nor do they realise that even the EU as a confederation of countries will only continue to exist as long as the Germans pay for the party.
Bullshit. Total bullshit. Go away from the idea of net contributors. In return we get markets. Also if we would invest more in the east, it would change.
@@blackhole3298 Thanks for confirming my point that it all depends on German tax money. You are a good example of the German who seriously believes he can buy everything with money, even the beliefs of Eastern Europeans. It's people like you who make Germans so popular abroad. As far as "markets" are concerned I might remind you of the fact that Germany is an exporter since it industrialised and not only since the EU was founded. The big difference is that non-Europeans pay at least with other goods in return, while Eurozone countries simply lend what they need from the European Central Bank and will never pay it back, so in the end it will again be the German taxpayer who funds the exports, thereby turning them into gifts.
@@bigtimegaming1576 Nope. Unity isn’t merely a matter of political structure. There is little homogeneity in Europe. Multiculturalism doesn’t work. No unifying language, history, tradition, identity. A U.S.E would just be an EU on steroids with all the problems dialed up to 11.
The USE is impossible to achieve. These are countries with different languages, different economies and different problems. You first need to erase the idea of nationalism and adopt a common language. Try telling a Frenchman that he’s no longer allowed to think of himself as French and that he now has to speak English because it’s the official language of the EU. Let me know what he says.
Not just Germany. But the EU is the most important thing ever happened to us Europeans. And language barrier is not really a thing, because the most EU citizens speak at least 2languages.
Without some form of increased European cooperation, in some 30-50 years all of the countries in Europe except Russia will become second rate powers at most, slowly sliding into more and more international irrelevance. There are only two types of countries in the world: rule makers and rule takers. Rule makers are the big three at the moment: USA, China and the EU, while everyone else either accepts their rules and gains access to prosperity, or doesn't and becomes increasingly marginalized. I'd say the United States of Europe is inevitable if we, Europeans, actually want to have a say over our destinies.
@@MeidoInHebun Putinland is a joke with similar GDP of Spain but with 100 million people more than Spain. Sad but Putin prefer to spend in the military 1/3 of Russian economy whilst Russian people work for less the 250$ per month.
Since the united states of Europe project is sponsored by bankers, multinationals, corporations and leftists/liberals, in case it may happen in the future we still won't have a say on our destinies.
We already had multiple multi ethnics empires in history; Austria Hungary, ottoman empire, Russian empire, french empire. They all collapsed because of ethnic tension and same goes for Yugoslavia. If Europe couldn't manage to keep Yugoslavia together then how are they supposed to united all of Europe under one flag? And this union would probably either be run By mostly a German administration since most influence in Eu is made by the Germans. This would bring the idea that the whole EU state is just a fourth Reich. And plus if things would go bad then there would be the most massive civil war that has ever been witnessed which each region blaming the other or exploiting one another for power which exactly happened in the final days of Yugoslavia before it fell into chaos.
It is a Franco-German idea that has constantly driven their respective policy ever since the end of Charlemagne. The Holy Roman Empire, the Napoleonic empire are just avatars of an old idea. However I don't think this will find any echo elsewhere, it's an old dream that is haunting these nations and will lead to a catasteophic result as usual.
only if the British or Americans attempt to block it or Russia, so far it's always been outside forces fearing the result and killing it rather than themselves winning it and then losing it on their own, the British are weak, the Americans are focused on China, the only real threat remains Russia which ironically fuels it's creation even more so.
@@golagiswatchingyou2966 Well i wanted to continue my comment and i totally agree these projects always end up smashed by external forces. However, the reason for this in my opinion is precisely that such a political union creates weakness and disorder and overall an incapacity to have a centralized and coherent organization. All the european projects have died, i don't see this one going any better.
@@tonyhawk94 the thing is many of them have actually worked, just that they got destroyed by outside forces or they failed to evolve beyond the point they were created. The nation of Germany for example was created by first loose confederation and then federalization, the whole ww1 and ww2 conflicts were about it working so well and expanded the reach of the nation that other powers feared it, same with France, same with the Hastatic league. The reason why the USA became a federation ironically is because they had few enemies around them and because France helped them to secure their independence, thus they could expand and expand without much fear of anyone trying to wage a massive war to try and stop them which thus far has been the case for most of Europe. There is also the issue that before, Europe was already expanding all around the world, the need for federalisme did not exist because they were the rulers of the world and thus federalization was not nessisary, untill Germany came to be and changed the dynamics of geo-politics. Make no mistake if the EU becomes a federation it will most likely have massive effects on geo-politics, will that outcome be good or bad? Who knows? However doing nothing or reverting back to 20th century nation states in the 21th century is bound to cause stagnation, decline and frankly humiliation for all of Europe, not just the EU.
Hahaha you mean you forgot all the wars that a European union has stopped because of this newfound unification. A stronger government is not worse than what you guys have now it'll improve and advance like every empire has done before it. It's people like you who always doubt and resist that end an empire.
As a German I disagree with the videos statement that a push for a united federal european state must come from its strongest member. I would say it is exactly countries like Romania and mostly the rest of eastern europe and the Balkans where such an initiative must come from. Eastern Europe only got its independence from the Soviet sphere of influence and so far I would say profited greatly in economic terms from being part of the EU. But all the focus on France and Germany (sometimes Italy and Spain as well) is an unfair bias towards Eastern europe which has all the same potential to play a major role in our common European history. That said, even today with free movement over borders I fell we achieved a lot already. lets cherish that.
Many of those hurdles are managing popular opinion. The surge of nationalist factions in recent years (something Russia has quietly stoked through disinformation campaigns and propaganda) is major barrier to a better functioning Europe. There's still a very strong urge in Europe towards the "small nation state". Consider the many seperatist movements that still exist
I am a Englishman at the age of 20 I came to what was called West Germany I am now 70 years old after 50 years living in Germany I have applied for citizenship after 2 years I have no reply from the German authorities? I had my own business English antique shop and English pub and I have my own real estate a German wife to German daughters four grandchildren have never broken any laws and have a lot of money assets on the bank I am very disappointed because if I live somewhere I would like to feel a part of it and have the possibility to vote and stay in the European community I must say I feel very unhappy about this situation but the Sims to be nothing I can do if I don't get a reply from the German government..
The EU almost united in the early 1950s. While the Governments were working on creating the European Economic Community (EEC), they as well were working on the European Defence Community (EDC) and European Political Community (EPC). The EEC was established, but the EDC and EPC unfortunately weren’t. The EDC, which effectively would have created an European Army, was ratified by Germany and the Benelux countries, but the French Parliament, after a new government got into power, narrowly voted it down. Then the Italians cancelled their debate and vote on the EDC, as it effectively was abandoned after the French voted it down. Then, after a European Defence failed, the Americans agreed to Germany getting it’s own military instead. The EPC, which would have created a united political system, also was abandoned after the EDC failed.
Anything can be Elaborated from The BIG OK that it is getting by the DAY big & bigger The APOGEE of WRONG V RIGHT To SAVE LIFE it take to BRAKE THE ICE the apogee. Anyone ?? As Humanity “ we “ still by now don’t know WHAT / HOW & WHEN “WE “ ARE finally achieved but not at last due to the Human-Being Nature travelling evolving part of Evolution like anything else. braking the Ice before, V braking the Ice now V future. Braking the ICE OF A KIND. So surprise or miracle or the unknowable by the Destiny, will also be part of the History Archive if “WE “ are to have anyone survived and sill alive. Long time from now on, the accessible Archive, as a guide to search/learn/reflect and adjust accordingly;, if there will be any human lucky enough to continue the HUMAN-BEING Kind of different character/personality/intellect of a new kind evolved over many more Centuries from Now on. One rule of Law : UNITY / COMMUNICATIONS and The quality of PATIENCE. Part of Evolution = Extinction V Destiny !!!! !! DO “ WE “ Need More Time ??? by Danny Marin Circo fb dmc32@email.com 31012022
I doubt this will happen. The national identity is too strong. Personally as a Dane I have always though the UK's exit was silly but if the alternative is an United States of Europe I'll do a 180 turn and vote for Denmark leaving the EU.
One of the reasons why we leave the EU is because The EU is the modern day soviet union . The United States of Europe is proof of that. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-m41Tdl5mvdg.html ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-xe0gt1QiAi0.html
National identity of today, is nothing more than the tribalism of ancient times, it did not stop Kingdoms like Denmark, from emerging out of the chaos and wars among tribes city states, and Empires. Of course Europe is being forged only by economics and diplomacy,this takes much longer than war. It will happen, as it must happen, by peace or war(EU needs a sort of Bismark), or Europe after being the "museum of the world",the "old sick men of the world", it will cease to exist, my bet, probably because of a Sino-Russian invasion. They won´t spare Denmark, even if it remains neutral,BTW Denmark was neutral against Nazi Germany got invaded and surrendered in 6 hours,your netrality wasn´t respected,and won´t be repected again. Despite advancements in civilization, and human rights, it still remains that "might makes it right"thats the supreme political law of this monetarist world. "Evolve, or die."
@@Unknown-pi5ll But it's not. The fact that the UK could leave like it did is a solid proof of that. For the EU to become like the united states the individual countries need to become subservient to the union. Right now the individual states can veto any changes. The UK did that a lot before they left.
@@errormatrix4159 all of human history have shown multiculturalism never works diverse country’s always collapse either through bloodshed or rarely peaceful means like Czechoslovakia , Yugoslavia , The Soviet Union , The Roman Empire , Ancient Greece , ancient Egypt , India and Pakistan , Sudan and South Sudan , Brazil , South Africa etc .
@@doodlePimp Aye it is they are just waiting to establish the EU army first Then use it to invade & conquer other lands also the EU is absorbing nation states destroying their unique national identities exactly like the Soviet Union . Go listen to Vladimir bukovecky in one of the videos I have shared in the comments he lived through the Soviet Union he noticed similarities between the EU & the Soviet Union .
@@zzap4922 I guess you know the problems between Greece, Cyprus and Turkey that has always been there but for the last couple of yeas things are getting worst. All it needs is just a small "accident" for things to get out of hand between them. Is there by any chance for Greece to have the same interests in Turkey as Germany or Spain? Greece is asking from Germany to postpone the construction of the new submarines and from Spain to postpone the construction of the new helicopter/horizontal aircraft crier. How can we be united if you don't care for the safety of two countries? Which are the borders of EU? Will all the Foreign Ministers of EU draw the same lines on the map and protect those borders?
@@zzap4922 language, regulatory, currency, economic, cultural barriers and more. A lot of thing in European countries are still locked behind the old borders
I don't see it being a success. The reason why the USA was able to form into one nation is because the states shared the same Anglo culture. Europe is too culturally diverse especially in regards to language.
The US was formed through conquest, and being in a relatively stable part of the world that was far-less interesting to major colonial powers like France, the UK, and Russia.
I was intrigued by how France, Belgium, Denmark, Ireland, Spain and Holland rejected "deeper integration" under the Maastricht Treaty in the late 1980s, some of which were EEC founder members.
Here in south america we had the same idea between chile and argentina in the 60s - 70s to form a country called "the united states of hispanoamerica" chile and argentina had good relations during that time and even we had a flag for the new country but things happened and uncle sam send coups to our countries and the dictatorships make our people hate each other to make sure we wouldn't attemp that anymore, if europe attempts that, uncle sam sinply wouldn't allow it.
I want a reunification with Spain.Just see how powerful the Hispanic countries will be.Imagine although south America not part of Europe geographically but form the body with Spain.Anyways,you are right with uncle Sam but I do support the idea of Europe uniting but still keeping their forms of government.I want to a EU army.With south america you guys needs to put your foot down.Uncle Sam did the same with Africa.But you know US is shaking if not careful they can break away.
@@intellectualnerd4544 No way. We love Spain only because it's already in the past. We are very different from Spain. And here in America we like it that way. Keep Spain in Europe.
@@intellectualnerd4544 believe it or not if you add every Spanish nation the result will not get close to half the power US have, US would be twice as rich, millitarly 10 times more powerful with a much higher literacy rate. Nowadays US alone can be compared to the entirety of Europe. Each Texas and California alone has a GDP close to Germany.
This video made a good case before the invasion of Ukraine.....now i think we can say that the bearish stance on a USE by the European member states is not so likely anymore. I actually think that a United states of Europe within the next 15 years is possible in some form.
Looking at the quality of life, availability of healthcare , corruption, lobbying, massive misuse of public spending etc. in the US, China and Russia, I sure as hell don't want a centralized federal state that is just as easily subverted to the whims of oligarchs and 'the elite'. The more removed the seat of power is from the common people the more easily does become blind to them. Another massive point is that the geography of the US supports unification, whereas in Europe it does not. There are no massive waterway networks that connect various economic production areas nor is there a unified landmass with extremely defensible outer borders. The realities of life are very different in the south vs the north, and in the west vs the east.
