I consider myself hardcore pro European (Euro-patriotic if you will) but I think one of the reasons we’re still standing is how decentralised this arrangement is. Poland seemed lost to propaganda but managed to bounce back. So could Slovakia or even Hungary. Infiltrating the EU is so much harder compared to a single, large nation because of that. It’s also a pretty effective tool against imperialism in our own ranks. If you take a look at what other countries are doing it seems to me in comparison we’ve got a good thing going.
I agree, but there’s definitely some more integration that can be done. An initially opt-in military organisation would be great because it doesn’t really make sense for individual EU countries to do military alone. We should never fight with other countries in the block (and a military organisation would make that impossible), and it doesn’t make sense that the EU wouldn’t protect other member states.
I guess we might get that for free when we inherit NATO…
Shared military is probably the single strongest reason US states could never leave the Union. It comes up every single time Texas or California talk about secession. Some of our largest military operations are in those states, they would never be allowed to leave. Once you have nationalized military you have soldiers with no allegiance to your own state in all your bases and your own soldiers are spread thin among all the other states with no way for you to recall them without appeasing the current head of the military who is also always more loyal to the union (or the military or themselves) than your state.
If the EU organised a proper centralised and integrated army, how would one country attack another one within this alliance?
I guess at some intermediary stages it would look more like NATO does now, with individual armies that are not very tightly integrated with each other, but if it’s being integrated into the EU I’m thinking more in terms of an EU central command. Similar to how it would be incredibly difficult for Sweden to declare war on Skåne.
I’m German so it’s kinda always been at the back of my mind 😅 But it still took me a while to come to terms with the fact that things could in fact become as bad if not worse than they were back then. 2025 has been very sobering in that regard.
I always appreciated what the EU stood for and what it did for its member nations, but I didn’t think that there was a chance that our membership would be brought into question, let alone that we’d leave. I wouldn’t shut up about leaving being a bad idea in the run up to the referendum. I took us being members for granted.
Yes but what use is a flabby confederation that can’t manage to speak with a united voice and does little more than distribute cash to the farmers of its increasingly autocratic members?
I’m caricaturing the situation but it’s not that far off.
No. Let’s get the EU to slowly move into a true federal model, improving on the good parts that already exist and creating new schemes of mutual approach as we advance. We do not need to become the USE.
Germany is a federation as well as Switzerland and Canada, the US and India.
How centralised and integrated a federation is will always be an ongoing discussion, but one could argue that the EU is a federal state in all but name.
Do you live in one of those countries and if so, do you think you can stack more layers of government of top of the current one or will it breaks the system? I can image adding layers to the bottom is much easier than adding one on top.
I live in a city (layer1) in the state of North Rhine-Westphalia (layer2) in the federal republic of Germany (layer3) which is a member state of the European Union (layer4). I have voted in elections for all of the above and have always supported the idea of a united Europe. I would vote for a federal democratic world parliament as well, if the UN would become a more meaningful body.
Imho a federal world should be the goal and a united Europe is a step in this direction — especially in times of worldwide crisis like climate change or global economic collapse. I like the principles of bottom up and subsidiarity, but I‘m aware that there will always be the possibility of to much centralisation. It’s a struggle that might never end.
I ask because I’m sure I want more European integration but am not sure about the way forward. It would make more sense if all levels had a similar election proces. Now I vote for my the leaders of the city in it, but in the Netherlands we don’t vote for our mayor. Then I also vote for the province, same story that the leader of the provincial government is always a neutral politician. But the provinces vote for the parlement (the part that doesn’t propose new laws but the part that approves them). Then I also vote for a person in the national elections, but this person is always part of a party although you don’t for the party. If your party wins, they can choose the prime minister. Although now for the first time ever the mayor party was forced by their coalition parties to have a neutral prime minister. Then I vote for someone a person in the EU, who is in a party which itself is in a party so even though my vote influences the flavour of the European government but it feels a bit off. I mean, europe considers itself an example of the democratic world but it feels like such a mess at the same time.
Oh, the different types of elections in Europe are a mess indeed but at the same time I‘m aware that they are the result of a long chain of compromises which are the foundation of any meaningful iterative democratic agreement.
The other one would be revolutionary and the last couple of decades were not a time of revolutionary change. Perhaps this happens in the coming years (looking at the current world political situation it seems more and more likely). But do we know if the outcome will be beneficial?
I would like to see the EU reform itself, but at the same time I know that democratic process has to be complex. „Streamlining“ as the US shows at the moment is not desirable if you like all the advantages of a caring society.
Time to make it true?
Eurasia here we come!
I consider myself hardcore pro European (Euro-patriotic if you will) but I think one of the reasons we’re still standing is how decentralised this arrangement is. Poland seemed lost to propaganda but managed to bounce back. So could Slovakia or even Hungary. Infiltrating the EU is so much harder compared to a single, large nation because of that. It’s also a pretty effective tool against imperialism in our own ranks. If you take a look at what other countries are doing it seems to me in comparison we’ve got a good thing going.
I agree, but there’s definitely some more integration that can be done. An initially opt-in military organisation would be great because it doesn’t really make sense for individual EU countries to do military alone. We should never fight with other countries in the block (and a military organisation would make that impossible), and it doesn’t make sense that the EU wouldn’t protect other member states.
I guess we might get that for free when we inherit NATO…
Shared military is probably the single strongest reason US states could never leave the Union. It comes up every single time Texas or California talk about secession. Some of our largest military operations are in those states, they would never be allowed to leave. Once you have nationalized military you have soldiers with no allegiance to your own state in all your bases and your own soldiers are spread thin among all the other states with no way for you to recall them without appeasing the current head of the military who is also always more loyal to the union (or the military or themselves) than your state.
I agree that an EU military would be a great idea but let’s say “less likely”. We used to say the same about nato and yet here we are.
If the EU organised a proper centralised and integrated army, how would one country attack another one within this alliance?
I guess at some intermediary stages it would look more like NATO does now, with individual armies that are not very tightly integrated with each other, but if it’s being integrated into the EU I’m thinking more in terms of an EU central command. Similar to how it would be incredibly difficult for Sweden to declare war on Skåne.
I’m European and happy to be but I also look at European history and don’t want us to go too hard.
Don’t take it for granted. Im British, I did. Many others did probably too.
I’m German so it’s kinda always been at the back of my mind 😅 But it still took me a while to come to terms with the fact that things could in fact become as bad if not worse than they were back then. 2025 has been very sobering in that regard.
I always appreciated what the EU stood for and what it did for its member nations, but I didn’t think that there was a chance that our membership would be brought into question, let alone that we’d leave. I wouldn’t shut up about leaving being a bad idea in the run up to the referendum. I took us being members for granted.
I agree with you about 2025 though.
Yes but what use is a flabby confederation that can’t manage to speak with a united voice and does little more than distribute cash to the farmers of its increasingly autocratic members?
I’m caricaturing the situation but it’s not that far off.
I love being part of the EU, but fuck no we shouldn’t band together as a single country.
Let’s make the USE a thing!
No. Let’s get the EU to slowly move into a true federal model, improving on the good parts that already exist and creating new schemes of mutual approach as we advance. We do not need to become the USE.
For now that can’t happen because certainly Hungary and likely Slovakia would veto it.
Creating a federation should be a long and difficult process. The most negotiated, the better.
deleted by creator
I prefer federated things
Germany is a federation as well as Switzerland and Canada, the US and India.
How centralised and integrated a federation is will always be an ongoing discussion, but one could argue that the EU is a federal state in all but name.
Do you live in one of those countries and if so, do you think you can stack more layers of government of top of the current one or will it breaks the system? I can image adding layers to the bottom is much easier than adding one on top.
I live in a city (layer1) in the state of North Rhine-Westphalia (layer2) in the federal republic of Germany (layer3) which is a member state of the European Union (layer4). I have voted in elections for all of the above and have always supported the idea of a united Europe. I would vote for a federal democratic world parliament as well, if the UN would become a more meaningful body.
Imho a federal world should be the goal and a united Europe is a step in this direction — especially in times of worldwide crisis like climate change or global economic collapse. I like the principles of bottom up and subsidiarity, but I‘m aware that there will always be the possibility of to much centralisation. It’s a struggle that might never end.
I ask because I’m sure I want more European integration but am not sure about the way forward. It would make more sense if all levels had a similar election proces. Now I vote for my the leaders of the city in it, but in the Netherlands we don’t vote for our mayor. Then I also vote for the province, same story that the leader of the provincial government is always a neutral politician. But the provinces vote for the parlement (the part that doesn’t propose new laws but the part that approves them). Then I also vote for a person in the national elections, but this person is always part of a party although you don’t for the party. If your party wins, they can choose the prime minister. Although now for the first time ever the mayor party was forced by their coalition parties to have a neutral prime minister. Then I vote for someone a person in the EU, who is in a party which itself is in a party so even though my vote influences the flavour of the European government but it feels a bit off. I mean, europe considers itself an example of the democratic world but it feels like such a mess at the same time.
Oh, the different types of elections in Europe are a mess indeed but at the same time I‘m aware that they are the result of a long chain of compromises which are the foundation of any meaningful iterative democratic agreement.
The other one would be revolutionary and the last couple of decades were not a time of revolutionary change. Perhaps this happens in the coming years (looking at the current world political situation it seems more and more likely). But do we know if the outcome will be beneficial?
I would like to see the EU reform itself, but at the same time I know that democratic process has to be complex. „Streamlining“ as the US shows at the moment is not desirable if you like all the advantages of a caring society.
I believe in building stronger alliances within EU, but making it a country is taking things way too far.