Is it time for Europe to unite?

[The Two Jerseys]

Yes, because nothing could possibly go wrong with Austria-Hungary on steroids...

[Greater Miami Shores]

Yes, because nothing could possibly go wrong with Austria-Hungary on steroids...

Great description.

[Purpelia]

Yes, because nothing could possibly go wrong with Austria-Hungary on steroids...

Great description.

I prefer to think of it as the Holy Roman Empire reborn. A nation that was neither Holy, Roman nor an Empire and as utterly dysfunctional as this fact would imply. The EU is just like that.
I mean, seriously, even the EU advocates on this thread are proof of that. They are literally advocating for the suppression of the national will of the member states for the sake of the EU.

As far as I am concerned the EU should have just been a trade union. Have a common market, that's fine. Have common production and quality standards and such. That's fine too. It helps trade. And while you at it I am not opposed to a common minimum standard for civilized things like privacy protection laws and the like. But that's it. No common currency and certainly no common economic policy. And keep any rules you make as the minimum standard people can and are expected to work up from as opposed to something they must stoop down to.

[The Blaatschapen]

Only to remaster the final countdown.

I approve.

[Vivolkha]

People really should stop dreaming of reviving long-dead empires when considering a reunified Europe. Reality is, history doesn't care at all if you liked the German Reich, the Holy Roman Empire or Austria-Hungary.

How are we defining Europe?

Generally the way that favours one's political position of the day, really.

Seeing "Europe" is not distinct from "Asia" as a landmass in any meaningful way, it's a geopolitical term that is defined according to one's values. It's actually a good indicator of how one sees the world.

Actually the borders of Europe as a continent are well-defined, even if somewhat arbitrarily. Its borders are Iceland, the Caucasus mountains and the Ural mountains, and includes tiny segments of Turkey, Azerbaijan, Georgia and Kazakhstan as well as European Russia obviously.

How you define Europe in a political sense, that's another whole story.

How are we defining Europe? Just current EU members? Others? Are Russia and Turkey supposed to be part?

My concern though is the assumption of the existence of a common European culture and values across all Europe when really the history, values and language of say Spain and Bulgaria have relatively little in common. We are already seeing this problem in the EU with the North and South divided on monetary policy and the East and West on social issues. Let alone the foreign policy contradictions between say Germany and Poland regarding Russia.

Hence I think maybe rather than one Europeans federation why not a few European federations, in some sort of alliance/economic association?

You could have a Nordic Federation, a Southern European Federation of the most Roman influenced places like Spain, France, Italy, Greece. Maybe very loose association for Eastern Europe, etc.
Although one for countries historically associated with Germany admittedly would be the most controversial given Germany’s history.

This causes less conflict as the Southern European and Northern Europeans need not fight over monetary policy any more, as each could have a separate one.

Parts of Europe do have a common history, culture, and were united in the past. But all of Europe seems likely to just have too many contradictions on key points to be particularly viable. And all of Europe has never really been a common thing.

I think 4 or 5 federations in some sort of economic association might be more viable than a single federation.

This benefits the northern countries and no one else. I don't expect the governments of Spain, Italy, Greece and the like to be competent on their own, let alone a federation of these countries.

[Vassenor]

no.

it would never work.

Why not?

[Purpelia]

People really should stop dreaming of reviving long-dead empires when considering a reunified Europe. Reality is, history doesn't care at all if you liked the German Reich, the Holy Roman Empire or Austria-Hungary.

Why so? They all represent examples of what happens when you try and force culturally and ethnically diverse populations many of whom have no love for one another into the same giant country. Other examples include literally every other empire ever.

no.

it would never work.

Why not?

The people of Europe simply have too many cultural differences for any unified government to be functional. Rules that work for say Germany are bad for Italy and vice versa. And of course there is the whole issue of the entirety of Eastern and Southern Europe just having emerged from being stuck in oppressive foreign empires 30-100 years ago. And of course the bad blood between some of the nations what with half of them being victims of imperial oppression and the other half being the benefactors of those same empires not so long ago.

[Novus America]

People really should stop dreaming of reviving long-dead empires when considering a reunified Europe. Reality is, history doesn't care at all if you liked the German Reich, the Holy Roman Empire or Austria-Hungary.

Generally the way that favours one's political position of the day, really.

Seeing "Europe" is not distinct from "Asia" as a landmass in any meaningful way, it's a geopolitical term that is defined according to one's values. It's actually a good indicator of how one sees the world.

Actually the borders of Europe as a continent are well-defined, even if somewhat arbitrarily. Its borders are Iceland, the Caucasus mountains and the Ural mountains, and includes tiny segments of Turkey, Azerbaijan, Georgia and Kazakhstan as well as European Russia obviously.

How you define Europe in a political sense, that's another whole story.

How are we defining Europe? Just current EU members? Others? Are Russia and Turkey supposed to be part?

My concern though is the assumption of the existence of a common European culture and values across all Europe when really the history, values and language of say Spain and Bulgaria have relatively little in common. We are already seeing this problem in the EU with the North and South divided on monetary policy and the East and West on social issues. Let alone the foreign policy contradictions between say Germany and Poland regarding Russia.

Hence I think maybe rather than one Europeans federation why not a few European federations, in some sort of alliance/economic association?

You could have a Nordic Federation, a Southern European Federation of the most Roman influenced places like Spain, France, Italy, Greece. Maybe very loose association for Eastern Europe, etc.
Although one for countries historically associated with Germany admittedly would be the most controversial given Germany’s history.

This causes less conflict as the Southern European and Northern Europeans need not fight over monetary policy any more, as each could have a separate one.

Parts of Europe do have a common history, culture, and were united in the past. But all of Europe seems likely to just have too many contradictions on key points to be particularly viable. And all of Europe has never really been a common thing.

I think 4 or 5 federations in some sort of economic association might be more viable than a single federation.

This benefits the northern countries and no one else. I don't expect the governments of Spain, Italy, Greece and the like to be competent on their own, let alone a federation of these countries.

Austerity =/= competence. It would benefit Southern Europe by allowing them to set different fiscal and monetary policies than Northern Europe.
Sure they would still have problems, nobody said it fixes everything but it at least ends the fuscal and monetary disputes.

[Vivolkha]

People really should stop dreaming of reviving long-dead empires when considering a reunified Europe. Reality is, history doesn't care at all if you liked the German Reich, the Holy Roman Empire or Austria-Hungary.

Why so? They all represent examples of what happens when you try and force culturally and ethnically diverse populations many of whom have no love for one another into the same giant country. Other examples include literally every other empire ever.

The point of my post is that, if Europe reunites, a 4th German Reich, a Holy Roman Empire or Austria-Hungary will not magically pop up from their graves and be restored to "greatness". Too many people have this kind of fantasy and I seriously can not comprehend why.

People really should stop dreaming of reviving long-dead empires when considering a reunified Europe. Reality is, history doesn't care at all if you liked the German Reich, the Holy Roman Empire or Austria-Hungary.


Actually the borders of Europe as a continent are well-defined, even if somewhat arbitrarily. Its borders are Iceland, the Caucasus mountains and the Ural mountains, and includes tiny segments of Turkey, Azerbaijan, Georgia and Kazakhstan as well as European Russia obviously.

How you define Europe in a political sense, that's another whole story.


This benefits the northern countries and no one else. I don't expect the governments of Spain, Italy, Greece and the like to be competent on their own, let alone a federation of these countries.

Austerity =/= competence. It would benefit Southern Europe by allowing them to set different fiscal and monetary policies than Northern Europe.
Sure they would still have problems, nobody said it fixes everything but it at least ends the fuscal and monetary disputes.

My point being, this new policies that Southern Europe would set would be rife with questionable economic policies and excessive government spending - it's exactly what you see today in those countries.

[Purpelia]

The point of my post is that, if Europe reunites, a 4th German Reich, a Holy Roman Empire or Austria-Hungary will not magically pop up from their graves and be restored to "greatness". Too many people have this kind of fantasy and I seriously can not comprehend why.

Given how "great" these nations were I'd actually expect a similarly horrible result. Well, maybe not as bad as the last time Germany tried it. That one was a bit of an outlayer. But overall pretty darn bad.

My point being, this new policies that Southern Europe would set would be rife with questionable economic policies and excessive government spending - it's exactly what you see today in those countries.

What constitutes excessive vs necessary government spending varies based on which school of economics you follow. And with economics being more of an art and philosophy than actual science yea... I would not go around making statements.

[Novus America]

Why so? They all represent examples of what happens when you try and force culturally and ethnically diverse populations many of whom have no love for one another into the same giant country. Other examples include literally every other empire ever.

The point of my post is that, if Europe reunites, a 4th German Reich, a Holy Roman Empire or Austria-Hungary will not magically pop up from their graves and be restored to "greatness". Too many people have this kind of fantasy and I seriously can not comprehend why.

Austerity =/= competence. It would benefit Southern Europe by allowing them to set different fiscal and monetary policies than Northern Europe.
Sure they would still have problems, nobody said it fixes everything but it at least ends the fuscal and monetary disputes.

My point being, this new policies that Southern Europe would set would be rife with questionable economic policies and excessive government spending - it's exactly what you see today in those countries.

But even if you disagree with those policies (despite the fact some aspects are less questionable as they allow Keynesian stimulus) they still then have the freedom to try what they want. Government spending is not necessarily bad and can be good, even if sometimes they go too far.

They do not think the economic and fiscal policies dictated by Brussels and Berlin are good, and Berlin thinks their economic policies are bad.

My solution keeps Berlin from imposing fiscal policies on them.

[Purpelia]

And more importantly should it not be the right of the people of these nations to decide what policies they want to follow? Should they not be free to succeed or fail on their own terms? Freedom is about being free to make your own decisions, right or wrong not about having the "right" answer pushed on you.

[The Alma Mater]

The point of my post is that, if Europe reunites, a 4th German Reich, a Holy Roman Empire or Austria-Hungary will not magically pop up from their graves and be restored to "greatness". Too many people have this kind of fantasy and I seriously can not comprehend why.


My point being, this new policies that Southern Europe would set would be rife with questionable economic policies and excessive government spending - it's exactly what you see today in those countries.

But even if you disagree with those policies (despite the fact some aspects are less questionable as they allow Keynesian stimulus) they still then have the freedom to try what they want. Government spending is not necessarily bad and can be good, even if sometimes they go too far.

They do not think the economic and fiscal policies dictated by Brussels and Berlin are good, and Berlin thinks their economic policies are bad.

My solution keeps Berlin from imposing fiscal policies on them.

So no solidarity between nations ? Because expecting Berlin c.s. to keep bailing them out forever is unrealistic, unless they can offer something in return.

[Novus America]

But even if you disagree with those policies (despite the fact some aspects are less questionable as they allow Keynesian stimulus) they still then have the freedom to try what they want. Government spending is not necessarily bad and can be good, even if sometimes they go too far.

They do not think the economic and fiscal policies dictated by Brussels and Berlin are good, and Berlin thinks their economic policies are bad.

My solution keeps Berlin from imposing fiscal policies on them.

So no solidarity between nations ? Because expecting Berlin c.s. to keep bailing them out forever is unrealistic, unless they can offer something in return.

Two groups with completely mutually exclusive ideas on a thing cannot find solidarity on that thing. “Solidarity” only makes sense if there is enough agreement,

But my solution solves that too. A separate Southern European Union could practice different fiscal policies than the North, but the North would no longer have to bail it out. Solves both problems. The North is tired of bailing out the south, the south tired of the North’s excessive austerity. So let them go their own ways on those issues. Still could have a common trade and travel, but without the more controversial aspects of EU rule.

Southern and Northern Europe have very different cultures and economic philosophies.

[Definitely Not Trumptonium]

Europe will absolutely never be united, culturally, socially, economically, or in political paradigm.

Federalising such states is not only a waste of time, it is an open invitation for another war in Europe in the future, not least insurgency.

[Ansarre]

How are we defining Europe?

Generally the way that favours one's political position of the day, really.

Seeing "Europe" is not distinct from "Asia" as a landmass in any meaningful way, it's a geopolitical term that is defined according to one's values. It's actually a good indicator of how one sees the world.

Actually Europe is distinct from Asia, anyone with a cursory knowledge of geography knows this. The Caucasus mountains, the Ural mountains, and the Dardanelles are our natural geographic boundaries. I am not being "Turkophobic" but Turkish people have a radically different set of cultural values, history, and worldview from Europeans. Controlling part of Thrace doesn't make you a European people.

snip

Maybe not completely open borders, but for the longest time, they pushed for borders that were extremely lax and went after countries that wanted to get tough. I know they did partially change this but still, it shows where they lean on immigration. If the E.U. becomes a unified nation, they should have the willingness to enforce their borders. Europe cannot take in every migrant nor should it.

Also, a federal EU should reject places like Turkey from membership. I do think Novus America gave a good point with different European cultures as well.

Incorrect. Advocates of EU integration have always pushed for strong external border control measures, as have right-wing eurosceptics. However, we reject internal borders. And yes, most advocates of European integration, at least the ones I am familiar with, do not favour Turkish membership of the EU.

definitely yes, but the cyprus problem wouldn't be right until it was resolved. EOKA terrorist thought seems unlikely before it ends]

Yes, the Cyprus situation needs to be dealt with. Turkish imperialists need to be told to leave the island immediately.

I don't think Europe is ready. Still too much ethnonationalism. The ratio of inter-European genocides and religious persecutions per century is still too high.

What? Ethnonationalism is practically irrelevant in Europe.

And more importantly should it not be the right of the people of these nations to decide what policies they want to follow? Should they not be free to succeed or fail on their own terms? Freedom is about being free to make your own decisions, right or wrong not about having the "right" answer pushed on you.

If you're not willing to cooperate then you shouldn't be part of the EU.

[Ansarre]

Europe will absolutely never be united, culturally, socially, economically, or in political paradigm.

Federalising such states is not only a waste of time, it is an open invitation for another war in Europe in the future, not least insurgency.

This is such a funny thing that you Americans like to say. Sorry but Europe has lived through many wars in the last century, we know the effects of them. We're a liberal people who want peace and prosperity for our continent. You'll actually find that European integration has helped end the likelihood of future wars significantly! You don't know what you're talking about buddy.

[Ifreann]

And more importantly should it not be the right of the people of these nations to decide what policies they want to follow? Should they not be free to succeed or fail on their own terms? Freedom is about being free to make your own decisions, right or wrong not about having the "right" answer pushed on you.

Is it not the right of the people of the nations of Europe to choose to unite?

[Vistulange]

Generally the way that favours one's political position of the day, really.

Seeing "Europe" is not distinct from "Asia" as a landmass in any meaningful way, it's a geopolitical term that is defined according to one's values. It's actually a good indicator of how one sees the world.

Actually Europe is distinct from Asia, anyone with a cursory knowledge of geography knows this. The Caucasus mountains, the Ural mountains, and the Dardanelles are our natural geographic boundaries. I am not being "Turkophobic" but Turkish people have a radically different set of cultural values, history, and worldview from Europeans. Controlling part of Thrace doesn't make you a European people.

You really have no idea about what Turkish people are like beyond a select few examples of a diaspora, Ansarre. It's fun when people who haven't ever lived in Turkey start talking about Turkish values, culture, and worldview. So please, spare yourself the embarrassment of thinking that you know about the bloody worldview of the inhabitants country of eighty million people when you've probably only met ten, twenty, maybe thirty living in your city, if that, when you cannot speak or understand their language, cannot consume their media, cannot understand what their daily problems are, cannot know what they talk about in their daily life, and so on.

Also, spare yourself the ridiculousness of self-righteously thinking "well its the Urals!" because that's what fits you. Mountains aren't natural boundaries, nor are rivers, because by that measure, you would think that the Rhine River, the Alps, and the Carpathian range would be "boundaries", but they really aren't, are they? By the way, the Urals aren't a massive wall of rock, there are some large gaps there that are, you know, traversible.

So, all in all, you're full of crap.

[Ansarre]

Actually Europe is distinct from Asia, anyone with a cursory knowledge of geography knows this. The Caucasus mountains, the Ural mountains, and the Dardanelles are our natural geographic boundaries. I am not being "Turkophobic" but Turkish people have a radically different set of cultural values, history, and worldview from Europeans. Controlling part of Thrace doesn't make you a European people.

You really have no idea about what Turkish people are like beyond a select few examples of a diaspora, Ansarre. It's fun when people who haven't ever lived in Turkey start talking about Turkish values, culture, and worldview. So please, spare yourself the embarrassment of thinking that you know about the bloody worldview of the inhabitants country of eighty million people when you've probably only met ten, twenty, maybe thirty living in your city, if that.

26,330,823 of those 80 million voted for an imperialist warmongering para-fascist. Two most recent polls give his coalition a majority of the vote too, and he has an approval rating of around 55%. That tells me all I need to know about Turkish peoples' mindsets. Not compatible with western values.

Also, spare yourself the ridiculousness of self-righteously thinking "well its the Urals!" because that's what fits you. Mountains aren't natural boundaries, nor are rivers, because by that measure, you would think that the Rhine River, the Alps, and the Carpathian range would be "boundaries", but they really aren't, are they? By the way, the Urals aren't a massive wall of rock, there are some large gaps there that are, you know, traversible.

Disingenuous remarks. The peoples living on both sides of the Rhine, both sides of the Alps, and both sides of the Caparthian range have common heritages and cultural values. That does not extent to those on both sides of the Dardanelles, the Urals and the Caucasus mountains.

So, all in all, you're full of crap.

No, I just don't want to welcome in a country where half the population are violent Islamists to a political union centered on freedom.

[Vistulange]

You really have no idea about what Turkish people are like beyond a select few examples of a diaspora, Ansarre. It's fun when people who haven't ever lived in Turkey start talking about Turkish values, culture, and worldview. So please, spare yourself the embarrassment of thinking that you know about the bloody worldview of the inhabitants country of eighty million people when you've probably only met ten, twenty, maybe thirty living in your city, if that.

26,330,823 of those 80 million voted for an imperialist warmongering para-fascist. Two most recent polls give his coalition a majority of the vote too, and he has an approval rating of around 55%. That tells me all I need to know about Turkish peoples' mindsets. Not compatible with western values.

You have literally no idea what Erdoğan represents, no idea what his policies are beyond some catchy buzzwords, and no idea about Turkish political history.

You don't engage in debate to get informed, you spout buzzwords to confirm your biases. Useless.

[Purpelia]

Actually Europe is distinct from Asia, anyone with a cursory knowledge of geography knows this. The Caucasus mountains, the Ural mountains, and the Dardanelles are our natural geographic boundaries. I am not being "Turkophobic" but Turkish people have a radically different set of cultural values, history, and worldview from Europeans. Controlling part of Thrace doesn't make you a European people.

And just what exactly are European values? Different parts of the EU have radically different cultural values in regards to absolutely everything.

Now, I am not saying that there are not some universal constants to be had. But to call these sufficient for an "European" identity is in my view problematic at best.

What? Ethnonationalism is practically irrelevant in Europe.

I am not sure you and I live on the same continent my friend.

If you're not willing to cooperate then you shouldn't be part of the EU.

What are you going to do? Give everyone a choice to submit or leave?

[Ansarre]

26,330,823 of those 80 million voted for an imperialist warmongering para-fascist. Two most recent polls give his coalition a majority of the vote too, and he has an approval rating of around 55%. That tells me all I need to know about Turkish peoples' mindsets. Not compatible with western values.

You have literally no idea what Erdoğan represents, no idea what his policies are beyond some catchy buzzwords, and no idea about Turkish political history.

You don't engage in debate to get informed, you spout buzzwords to confirm your biases. Useless.

I don't engage in debate to get informed, I engage in debate to present my viewpoint as correct and try to convince others of that. Erdogan is an imperialist para-fascist and he should be given the Saddam treatment.

[Vistulange]

You have literally no idea what Erdoğan represents, no idea what his policies are beyond some catchy buzzwords, and no idea about Turkish political history.

You don't engage in debate to get informed, you spout buzzwords to confirm your biases. Useless.

I don't engage in debate to get informed, I engage in debate to present my viewpoint as correct and try to convince others of that. Erdogan is an imperialist para-fascist and he should be given the Saddam treatment.

That's cute.

You haven't rebutted any of my points, especially regarding your utter and sheer lack of knowledge regarding Turkey, especially its culture and worldview.

So, again, buzzwords. Again, useless.

[The Alma Mater]

You have literally no idea what Erdoğan represents, no idea what his policies are beyond some catchy buzzwords, and no idea about Turkish political history.

You don't engage in debate to get informed, you spout buzzwords to confirm your biases. Useless.

I don't engage in debate to get informed, I engage in debate to present my viewpoint as correct and try to convince others of that. Erdogan is an imperialist para-fascist and he should be given the Saddam treatment.

Ironically, that is what Erdogans screams about many European nations