🟢 Try Speakly with first 7 days for free and get 60% discount on an annual subscription: speakly.app.link/goodtimesbadtimes 📌 Support GTBT on Patreon! www.patreon.com/GTBT ➡ Paypal: www.paypal.com/paypalme/GoodTimesBadTimes
To put it simply. Federal EU would not happen! (at least for now) Thing is that France and Germany proved to be ineffective in ruling Europe. They compliance with Russia, is major issue. Europe was not fully in vassalage of Putin, only because majority of EU countries actually hold sane approach and counter it. Whole Federal project is only serving purpose of restoring Franco-German dominance, instead actually repairing issues of Europe.
i think European federation idea wouldn't be supported in national referendum. why giving even more sovereignty away? so i had to dislike this video. because i dislike federation idea.
@@TheRezro the Franco-German dominance does not exist, since they would be rivals. In human history, two major powers clash each other for dominance. No agreement would happen. Least but not last: the other countries would not accept to be ruled by one of them.
@@JT.Pilgrim CANUK isnt happening ever it was only just a weird fantasy of some of the terminaly online Brexit fans who couldnt cope with how badly they screwed up
@@Gio-ym4uj Me too, rightwing but very pro EU. And its a challenge because even following politics on the national level feels like a full time job already. 😂
@@fischersfritz468 I get your point. But people can barely keep track of politics within their country and that gets much more media attention than whatever EU does. Yet the EU train keep rumbling on so im in favor of governments creating more awareness
This is actually a result of a loose union. People care about politics only when it affects them. Since EU politics affect you less than national politics, you care only about national politics. But if the EU parliament would have a clearer and bigger impact on your life then, EU elections would be more interesting. Like how mostly nobody knows or cares about their local mayor or knows who their representative is, but they know the PM/President.
For those of you who felt that the conclusion was too short and did not give answers to still valid questions - sorry, we would break the 1 hour mark. But we'll try to find them and answer in early 2024. Why is the EU lagging behind? What are the main obstacles for Europe to catch up with the US or China? Is it possible to overcome them by bringing together all European interests? We will try to make an honest, supranational reflection.
Im kinda dissappointed that you skipped Brandt and Schmidt. Especially sine Schmidt was a Eurofederalist who built the groundwork of the Euro with Giscard
In June I was at the EYE2023 conference in Strasburg. I was honestly surprised to see there special areas and tents promoting the federalization of EU. A conference for European Youth should have a big diversity of views and discussions on these topics, but the feeling I left with, as a Romanian working and living in Poland, is that their vision of what EU is and what is should be is very different in the west of the continent. While for us here the EU is a tool to reach the objective of a better living and economic development, the westerners I've met there had the opinion that the EU is the final objective, to promote and enforce certain values.
Then u havent talked to anyone outside large cities. I wasnt aware of those tents but it doesnt surprise me, I will be voting for whatever party is against federalisation.
you know very well that back in Romania politicians are corrupt as f, so we need rules and holds in place to get rid of corruption because local corrupt politicians wont change those rules that made them rich. Only this way Romania can prospere, eliminating corruption. So a federal EU its absolutely necessary! Cheers from a Romanian living in UK
What citizens think the EU is for is radically different from what those in the top positions of power in the EU think. They don't care about values or economic growth, except as how those things can be used to leverage their own power. They use that power to sideline competitors (France>UK) and the freedom to wield it as they see fit, and to hell with the people.
Imagine an alternate universe where there is a Unites States of Europe and they are arguing against the American Union becoming a federation arguing membee-state sovereignty, and fearing the anti-ch--t, etc.
I think a great comparison can be made with the states of the Indian Union. Though most are majority Hindu now, their customs, language and culture do vary considerably. The individual states as independent countries would hardly be considered important on a global state. But India, as the Indian Union, does feature heavily in the global stage. The citizens of smaller EU countries need to ask themselves the question, of how irrelevant their countries will become on the global stage without a unified European State acting as a super-power on its own. The two choices are independence but irrelevance OR Closer integration into a federal state with the rights and opportunities presented by being a citizen of a superpower, albeit with some loss of independence for individual states. As for the baltic states fearful of western European miscalculations on Russian advances, it must be noted the response from Brussels would be far more robust if the Baltic countries sovereignty was directly in its interest as part of greater European superstate (defending themselves) vs the sovereignty of an allied partner (defending others).
The "smaller" european countries will be made irrelevant in the EU also. Their interests will be sold out to the highest bidder, their territories will be just a buffer to bargain with outside powers. There is no solidarity within Europe, there are only interests of states, and we have just given even more strength to the strongest ones.
As an American, I agree that Europe must come together, but I believe there still must be cultural autonomy, but I believe in one foreign policy and military for Europe. For my country America, I believe in something similar. A synthesis of autonomous states with Freedom of Association and One Foreign Policy and Federal Military.
If my country is going to lose independence to a European State then it will become irrelevant either way. So it it is not a choice between independence or irrelevance. But between being independent and irrelevant (and the level of this irrelevance is very much debatable depending on the country) or losing independence and relevance as long as you are not German or French. Also, the creation of the European Federation doesn't guarantee that all its citizens will be treated fairly and equally. I am not risking becoming a second-class citizen in a bureaucratic nightmare run by people who will look down on me because I wasn't born in Western Europe.
The only way to have a properly functioning federal system is to renounce the idea of a two-speed Europe and come to terms with the potential prospect of Germany and France losing their leading role on the continent to Eastern Europe and countries such as Poland, Romania, etc. This will never happen, however, because Eastern Europe playing the role of a pariah of the West and Russia is the norm for Western politicians and this will not change. The form of federalization of Europe presented by Germany and France is only to tighten their influence on the continent and centralize the European economy in Berlin and Paris, naturally excluding smaller countries. Talking about equality and unity in Europe in this state of affairs is nothing more than a lie and in the end it will end with the collapse of the idea of European integration and increasing divisions.
Why would France and Germany with a combined GDP of 7 trillion usd and 150 million people renounce to leading the EU? Why would small and poor eastern europe lead anything, if west of the Oder River you have 2/3rds-ish of the EU population?
@@FOLIPE Russia should join in and Balance the whole thing out :) ironically the EU needs Russia if it is to survive and compete against China and the U.S Siberia will allow the EU to stop being neocolonialist and loot resources from Africa and turn to exploiting Siberia which would on EU soil subject to EU laws and regulations.
@FOLIPE Like I said they won't. However, it is somewhat foolish. Germany and France want to compete with US and China's economy and They cannot do it o their own. When they talk about catching up to the rest, they talk about the EU catching up, not them catching up. They need the whole Europe, to be able to compete, which means they need "small nad poor Eastern Europe". They need their manpower, their potential and economy to unify Europe's economy. That's the only way to compete with the rest. However, Eastern Europe won't accept these terms because they know that France and Germany needs them and they know that they supposed to be second class for them. They know their potential and that over time, they can have a strong voice on the continent. For example, Poland as a country is not "small and poor" anymore. Warsaw, in a level of development resembles Western capitals. Their GDP still grows rapidly and they have the potential to have a bigger influence on the continent. And they know it. That's why, if Germany and France want Federal Europe, a unified and functioning federal Europe, they would have to agree with Eastern Europe's national interests and let them strengthen themselves in order to call their offer favorable for these nations.
Fundamentally, you either HAVE a hegemon, or you ARE a hegemon. Divided, the individual EU states have a hegemon (most of the time the US, sometimes France or Germany), united the EU would BE the hegemon. You either wield the knife or lie on the stone and I would much rather be the one that wields the knife, than to be butchered on the stone.
@@wzburzonykisiel We would absolutely give up power towards pretty much any guy from every country in the EU. In fact, once this federation would be achieved Germany fro example would go back to sleep, and just do business and only minimal engagement in politics. It is also your union. It is your power that you can shape and form. However, you have to be European if you want that position. You have to be there for all europeans. You Eastern Europeans hide in your country and especially with your population difference that makes you invisible. You want this power? You want to be most on top of the world? Do it like Kallas. Give press conferences in other countries, talk to the large population of Western Europe. Don't be afraid to create visibility by mingling into other countries affairs. Your name sounds polish to me: You think it would be wrong to go to Germany, Italy, Slovenia, Spain to talk to local electorate and mingle in other countries politics. NO. You are allowed to do that, and if you present solutions, you can shape the union and lead the union, BUT, your strict nationalism prevents that!
I think that realistically it would be much more convenient if, within the European Union 🇪🇺, the four main economies (Germany 🇩🇪, France 🇫🇷, Italy 🇮🇹 and Spain 🇪🇸) had greater cooperation and coordination with each other on key issues such as security, defense, trade or new technologies. This way Europe could compete in better conditions against other world powers such as the United States 🇺🇸, China 🇨🇳 or India 🇮🇳.
@@Schwarzie10 I cant talk about Italy. But Spain is starting to change that, specially in IT, many graduates find jobs in spanish or international companies but living in Spain. We have a brain drain problem? Yes. Specially in the top (CEO's, great scientist, etc...) But last 5 years we have improve and in fact Spain is slowly starting to attract international talent more and more.
If rural europeans think they currently are ignored while faraway bureaucrats fawn over urban areas (and their densely populated voting blocks), imagine how forgotten you will be if the government is responsible for the entire continent.
While it is sad that rural areas is forgotten, it is understandable why it is that way. Because most people live in urban areas that will also be prioritized by politicians.
I say that if you feel forgotten by your government, then move to a place where you...don't? Besides, feeling like your government isn't doing enough is a completely subjective thing to feel, like what do you mean by that? Do you mean forgotten as in "the buildings in my community are made of balsa wood, duct tape, and dreams. Godzilla came through here 5 minutes ago and I have 4 different waterborne diseases and 30 peasant children to feed after they come back from their 20 hour shift in the coal mines." ? Or do you mean forgotten as in "boohoo I lost my job, must be the government's fault and totally not because I harassed 5 female interns at my workplace and hurled racial slurs like cluster munitions." ? I think that if you choose to live in a rural place you have no right to complain about the government because you literally live in a place where there is little government. Do rural people really want the entire government to come to Joe's rustic cabin in the middle of the woods for a sleepover? No. Lots of people who choose to live in rural areas live there because they don't want government around. They just want their little farm and some peace and quiet away from everything. I think that if you choose to live that way then you have to come to terms with the fact that little Timmy won't be getting an Oxford education in Ruralsville: population 6. What I'm saying is: expect to be left alone, and expect to not get any help or opportunity when you live in a place with no people around. No people = You're on your own, good luck. If you don't like that burden, *psst* ᵐᵒᵛᵉ ᵗᵒ ᵃ ᶜᶦᵗʸ Apparently, that's where all the jobs are.
@@zericle1You're projecting hard there about harassing female coworkers. Got something to share buddy? And what if I don't wish to move? I feel just as patriotic for my small town as I do for my country. Additionally, what you're proposing is simply stupid. Rural areas produce food, if everyone moves away from the countryside into the city, then from where do you get food, genius?
@@doktorhabilitowanystanczyk Thanks for insinuating that I harass women, that was very nice and adult of you. I really love waking up to see that, that made my day! You seem to think that I hate rural people, that's not true at all. In fact, since you seem to think you know me so much and really want me to share something with you, so I'll let you in on a secret. I was on a farm at one point in my life. But I didn't like it, I hated it actually, and so I moved to the city a few years ago. Doing that helped me very much, I was able to get away from a lot of bad shit, able to go to college, and I was able to find job opportunities I wouldn't find back where I used to live. And that's why I'm a smart ass. You also think food is only grown in the countryside, also not true. The wonders of hydroponics, am I right? You gotta laugh a little, you're bumming everyone out. Can't read between the lines, hates attempts at comedy, negative about this and that... I know I may be a little crass, and sarcastic, and yeah some people don't like that, but you gotta be that way when people are seething, and angry, and serious all the time, when you live around liars, hypocrites, just general negativity, and all that bullshit. My mom taught me the importance of turning the other cheek, and being polite, so... I hope you have a nice day. and I'm sorry if you feel bad, that quite literally wasn't my intention, you know? I was just trying to make some people laugh and give some advice based on my own experiences and quirkiness, as you do time to time in the comments. I guess you can't please everyone. Ah well.
For this to happen, EU needs a common link language that needs to be enforced in member countries for the purposes of Administration, Higher education, Judiciary, Jobs, Banking services, etc. Companies do not want to rely on leniency of countries but rather look for "official common link language" status. There are other big markets like USA which has English, China which has Standard Mandarin, India which has English, etc. So EU has the option to create a common link language (English) or become irrelevant in near future.
We need a unified Europe to survive the 21st century. Europe is getting older and smaller (not in physical size ofc). What chance does a loose union of micronations have in a century dominated by economic titans? I think we should start with all states that want in on a United States of Europe and leave it up to the rest if they want to join in sooner or later. Smaller States (like the Czech Republic, Austria and Hungary) will soon see that surviving as small states will be next to impossible. We have to adapt or we will slowly wither away. Do we want to leave the future to the Chinese or the Americans? That is a question we Europeans have to face. Do we want to see our lands slowly becoming more and more impoverished? We already see the writing on the walls, with shops closing everywhere, Inflation and rising taxes and costs of living. This will only become worse if we leave it up to the U.S. or China, because they can write the rules while we are forced to play their games.
Problem is, a federation of the kind that the EU leaders dream about is essentially impossible. It could happen in a couple of hundred years sure, or with conquest. But not with the multicultural, weak culture of the EU leaders. Which vision are they trying to sell? Being ruled from Brussels by un-elected commissars? No common religion or culture? They simply do not have a vision, nothing to sell other than better regulation. Most Europeans want to keep their identity, and independence in the matters that are not currently ruled by EU. The only reason federations (empires) work, is due to violence and cultural supremacy. Anything else is a pipe-dream.
Traditional empires generally allowed a wide degree of sovereignty to their subjects. usually revolving around paying a tribute and providing troops and allegiance.
They are trying to make melting pot with mixing bunch of different people in Europe as we speak. You cant travel over the border unless you are paperless migrant lol
@@goldbullet50 yeah but they crashed rebellions by force and over time forced cultural assimilation or face annihilation how do you think China became 99% Han Chinese? China was never a ethno state and the Han homeland is only alongside the Yellow river and not much more.
@@covfefe1787 "Han" is basically like "European" in the sense of ethnicity... Many Han subgroups speak mutually non-intelligible languages, about as similar with each other as the big European languages. Only about 2/3 of Han speak (some variety of) Mandarin as their first language. And Mandarin itself, with all its varieties, is more like a big language family in Europe like Slavic, Germanic, or Romance rather than a single European language. Whereas "Chinese" is like "European" in the sense of living in Europe.
@@hyhhy g Good lord. That is a stretch…..”Han” is like “European”… Two “polar” opposite cultures. Literally. Throw in a dash of CCP/Communist/Soviet influence and ya’ got European. 🫡😆
The biggest political problem in Europe is a question: where does the EU end and sovereignity begin? Everything depends on answering this! I think that this should be publicly discussed and various ideas put forward in the public arena. It's far past time for this as all too soon other things will need to be done. This could well include a European Army and probably Navy and Airforce. This goes well into to sovereign matters. There could be others like perhaps horizontal fiscal equalization. Also quite possibly foreign policy issues.It's worth pointing out the history of many of these countries is one of war going back more than a thousand years. It's got some good points such as standardised trade rules and allows for big dollar projects like the Baltic states railroad and probably to Finland . Various political models and how this would be done must be discussed. there is a real fear of countries being reduced to a province akin to say Wyoming in the USA no disrespect meant. There is also the possibility of countries having seriously dissenting views on say a war with Russia. such a situation requires a definite command structure vis a vis the EU and the individual states. Who is going to have that authority? There are messier questions like should nuclear weapons be made and its command structure. I am not trying to tell anyone what to do ,I just ask that people start to think about all this, whether it's at work, home, in their respective leglistures and at the EU Level. The decisions made today may impact the next few hundred years.
You imply being part of a larger federation like the EU means you inherently lose sovereignty on a national level. Sovereignty is not a zero-sum game. It's also not intrinsic to a nation. Sovereignty is what's awarded to you by your neighboring nations through either your diplomatic efforts or through your show of force. Just declaring to be sovereign on your own is only granting you 'your' sovereignty until someone else just casually decides to waltz in. Ask 19th century Japan about that. For example if you're a small country, isolated and on your own, you can't expect to be able to put any political weight into any scale when played by any of the major powers (US, China, and a host others, depending on your size). You can scream what you want, try to get the U.N. to listen to you all you want. In the end all your 'sovereignty' will be for naught. In practice, you won't have any of it. Ask Georgia and the Chechens, ask many an African nation, ask pretty much any member of the Warsaw pact when that pact existed. And if the E.U. may ever break, ask any European nation, including the big ones. Of the two that may make a dent wholly on their own, one of them is currently locked in an existential crisis of 'warrific' proportions (Ukrain) and the other has too messy politics and other instabilities it will currently not be able to fend for its own (Turkye). The other 'great' European nations are too weak to even consider. Yes, that includes 'Great' Britain (political mess and historical and current class squabbles splitting the population), France (integration problems from a still looming colonial past), Germany (the cultural after-effects of WW2) and if I'd add any other nation to that list, Poland is the first one that comes to mind, but Poland has the problem it's Poland. The land consists of a completely indefensible plain that can be easily invaded from their coast, the east and the west. If the Russ^h^h^h^hMuscovites would enter one of the E.U. states and they would not be united at all (either through the E.U. or through NATO), they will have easy pickings. Not only for the Baltics, Also Finland won't hold, neither will Poland (despite their efforts)... They'll have free reign up to the harbor of Rotterdam and then have the option to go south if they want so. So don't talk about insular sovereignty unless you are committed to defend that sovereignty with your blood and bones. For anyone that's willing to corporate, you can share your sovereignty with each other through the setup of well thought out governmental structures, which I expect the E.U. institutions to provide for its citizens. And the E.U. can expect in return I will participate (vote) in them accordingly. That way I know my sovereignty is secure.
Economic Union is desirable and should stay. Military cooperation and protection is also desirable. EU enforcing regulations such as on quality of food, and manufactured products being sold in the EU territory is also good. The EU should never meddle in local culture, such as by enforcing an official language or banning another language. No one state within the federation should be favoured in language, economy, or political power.
@@norielgames4765 That is why you should actively work towards your goals. We are at the beginning of something big, every decision we make now on how to federalize (or otherwise to disband) will kick off a tornado in the future. Right now the world atmosphere is so volatile, you can truly make history!
I think it is only possible through two-tier Europe. Let say 20 countries decided to federalize and form a single country European Federation which is going to be part of existing status-quo European Union with other 7 countries that decided not to federalize. Then non-EU countries can join status-quo European Union if all 8 members approve with existing procedure or join European Federation with approval of only European Federation basing on the established precedent when East Germany joined West Germany and thus future EU without any asking for unanimous vote from EU members.
Canada has much more in common with the USA, than any 2 European neighbors. Why does nobody expect Canada to join the US? That will be same answer, against Euro federalist nonsense.
Thanks for putting out such great content! I love these videos. It really feels like I'm getting a look at the big picture. They are so well researched. I really enjoy how deep you go into the history, demographics, economics and all kinds of different contexts. Very well done!
The ending of the remaining veto areas would be foolish. Note how strategically misguided, for different reasons, France and Germany were in their Russia policy. Note also how badly France's attempts to maintain its colonial oversight of West Africa are currently backfiring. This video shows throughout how self-interest motivates these two powers. Recent experiences shows how misguided their policy can be as a consequence. The smaller countries will always need a dependable braking mechanism.
@@catalindeluxus8545 As Britain is no longer involved, fortunately that conundrum is not one I have to worry about. But in view of the catastrophic leadership provided by France and Germany separately in recent years over fundamental issues threatening the security of the bloc, I would be every bit as concerned about the poor leadership that they would offer you as about how frustrating Hungary can be over the next few years.
@@catalindeluxus8545people like you are exactly why the EU should never become federal. Almost all nations only joined for economical benefit. But now if they differ in opinion and act accordingly with their Brussel masters, they're treated as and deemed traitors and bad actors. Its empire building and colonisation with a different name. Offer economic and industrial benefits in exchange for total subservience.
True, but a truly *federalized (super)state* would have it's own, independent, unified unilateral perspective on foreign policy arising from it's direct responsibility for the entirety of the federation. A truly federalized governing body would have sufficiently broad representation from all constituent states and enough of their representative ruling coalitions, alongside legislative superiority in the areas of foreign policy and defense, and as such the federal state would not be making decisions "as France" or "as Germany," although it is true that in reality it would something more like a "as French-German coalition with minority partners chosen from random smaller European states currently ruled by parties with sufficient ideological similarity to the elected federal government." I'm pretty sure if Texas, California, and New York states were all separate governments making their own foreign policy and defense decisions, they'd be making some *pretty fucking stupid decisions,* especially compared to the USA (which also, we mustn't forget, proves that any federal country can make catastrophically inept and utterly moronic decisions pretty much back to back to back for literal centuries and get away with it pretty much without negative consequence as long as they have a *big fucking armed force* with hegemonic power over it's competitors and allies both). A unified federal European state would have a, let's be blunt, non-trivial hegemonic economic and military potential, especially compared to France or Germany as single states. Also worth remembering that functionally nobody with any semblance of respect or influence correctly and accurately predicted the Russian invasion of Ukraine, so claiming they were "strategically misguided" in their Russia policy is pretty silly, bluntly. The Russian possibility of invasion of Ukraine was considered to be *catastrophically stupid* to the point of being infeasible, and that was before the invasion when we still Russia's armed forces were moderately competent. Not only have they proven themselves to be grossly underpowered compared to previous estimations, but Putin has also personally demonstrated that *he's a fucking idiot, and arrogant to the point of self-destruction.* Of course, you aren't wrong that France's struggle to maintain it's colonial sphere of influence is both misguided and morally bankrupt to the point of total unjustifiability, and the root of the problem(s) are the self-interested myopia of both powers. The solution, however, isn't political balkanization and checks designed specifically to be used by reactionaries and conservatives in the pursuit of maintaining reactionary and conservative state-policy at the expense of a federal, continental policy platform promulgated in accordance with a continent-wide electoral mandate under federalized, proportional principles.
I do agree that Europeans should be consulted, but a no from some nations should not put a stop to a closer union for the rest: it should led to the creation of multiple tiers where those nations remain behind.
@@nicoruppert4207the US was not. Obama explicitly campaigned for remain, and it Has been US policy that European integration is good as it frees up US resources. The US is not scared of a United Europe
As someone in Ireland who loves the EU I can't help but also be suspicious of federalisation. Our voting power got weakened a lot in the Lisbon treaty, and I don't really trust the Germans and French to not keep centralising power once we have lost our veto to the point where what we lose control of our own country. Also I think Ireland's democratic system is structured better than a country like France's. I would want the EU Parliament to be a much bigger part of this and for France and Germany's egos to get out of the way. Also there are a lot of far right parties in the EU that are a hair away from taking power, and I'm apprehensive about whatever that is going to mean for these countries and would therefore mean for Ireland in a tighter union. I appreciate a lot of the EU's policies and honestly there are many times I've preferred them over our own governmental decisions. But I get the sense that what I would need to be reassured to agree to join a federation is currently beyond what France and Germany would be willing to concede.
@@fernet8394 Maybe they'll surprise me. Legitimately if the offer is good enough and I have to vote in a referendum I'll go for it. I just want very steadfast assurances that over time the federalised EU won't be restructured so that smaller countries have less and less say and relevance.
@@fernet8394 Sure, what about France almost declaring war on UK for fishing rights then not long after acting like Ukrainian grain don't affect Polish farmers at all?? After a massive crisis they finally took measures and tried to make both sides happy instead of blindly supporting Ukraine. But when their own people loose money they get mad instantly. If you want to become a subject of Franco-Germans be my guess but don't expect others to act so foolishly..
Both France and Germany wanted a federal Europe, Maggie Thatcher said the U.K. did want to be part of the federation. The U.K. joined the Common Market, a trade area not a federation.
As of now the only country that has experience as a federation is germany with its 16 states and even integrating east germany hasnt been that successful and left people unsatisfied. Most other countries have never been federalized and especially france seems extremely centered around paris, with comparably little protection of local cultures (for example france still hasnt signed the european charter for minority languages, even though france has such a diverse linguistic landscape). The idea is great in concept but i dont know wether france would really be able to work well in federation. There are also issues with wealth redistribution, in germany there are already richer states complaining about funding of weaker states. Imagine what this would be on a larger scale.
@theChaosKe 🇨🇭🇨🇦🇦🇺🇺🇸🇮🇳 : We assume you mean in the EU, and not just in Europe (switzerland), or the rest of the world (US, australia, canada, India, etc).
Only drawback for an European superstate is that a growing part of the population says 'no f-ing way'. And rightfully so, the EEG was sufficiënt enough.
At 1.35 or so, the resolution of November 2023 to remove the national veto is much less likely to have passed if the UK and Gibraltar had still been in the European Union, at least unamended. Hence the happiness of most of the European political elite for the UK and Gibraltar to leave the European Union. What is required is to bring some form of well-structured referendum system into being, drawing on a full range of examples: Switzerland, Ireland and others. What is also required is that all this is brought back into line with the prediction of Oswald Spengler in 1918 in his "The Fall of the West", as quoted by Archimandrite Justin Popovich in his "the Orthodox Church and Ecumenism" of the return and restoration of the West to its previous, pre-1054 Great East-West Schism status of (True) (Orthodox) (Catholic) Christian Civilization. This means having an Emperor and a basic law and Constitution (which should be that of the restored Third Rome, Russia (shorn of its Asian territories, possibly) with the end of the Roman Papacy and one (True) (Orthodox) (and Holy Catholic and Apostolic) Patriarch for all of Europe, in accordance with the Orthodox prophecies, which, by definition never err, that the laws of the Roman Emperors Theodosius the Great and Justinian must be applied properly: no law is valid unless it complies with God's law, i.e. Canon law. The first principle of this law is that necessity knows no law. Hence King David distributed the show bread, 🍞🥖, only meant to be eaten by the priests, to his starving soldiers. This has to act as a filter. The EU and its predecessor communities as well as EFTA and the EEA, are, in fact, confederations, not federations, in terms of classical political science definitions, because their members have always had the right to secede. As was the Soviet Union, is Liechtenstein (with the 11 villages within it having that right), and has been Canada since 2000 with a ("Federal") Dominion of Canada Act defining how secession can occur. For the European Union to become a Federal State, as classically defined and without which the term is meaningless, it would have to abolish the right for its member states to secede. What is being proposed, at least for now, and in line with Article 50 of the 2009 Treaty of Lisbon, requiring member states to give two years notice of leaving and to leave in accordance with their own constitutional requirements, is actual a European Confederal state.
I travel a lot globally. It part of my profession for many years. It have changed me and made new feel that Europe is my home. Not just the country in Europe I live it, but all of Eurpoe. Europe is quite diverse, but does have some critical common and important similarities. So I will welcome a united Europe. Sadly it will likely not happen in my lifetime though.
There’s nothing I’d want more then a federalized Europe. Despite the fact that I’m deeply distrustful of the institution in Brussels. It bothers me that there’s (in the mainstream) little room for positions that aren’t anti federalization or pro EU. I.e there’s no room for the Pro federalization, anti EU of us. If I had to vote between them I’d still vote for a federal state under the EU, as once it’s done the institution can be changed from the inside.
I suspect that only a typical "EU" exercise in double standards, hypocrisy and the coercion of smaller member states will get you anywhere near the "EUSSR" which is what a federal superstate would be in practice, but mercifully we British have already escaped so it's not our problem. Though the obvious defence implications of such a state are its inevitably supplanting NATO's European pillar and so should also result in our full and immediate withdrawal from that too. Hopefully along with the other non-EU allied powers, especially the other two Anglosphere ones.
It took me 20 minutes into the videi to realise we've been blessed with an HOUR long video essay. And with so many exciting citation I didnt know about yet. That monograph of Post War Western Europe looks delightful especially. I thought it curious that the 22 november vote in the European Parliament hasn't been covered or touched upon yet on the geopolitics side of youtube. If you don't later in the video, it's worth mentioning, I think, that much of the proposal stems from the European Citizens' Initiative, a mechanism aimed at increasing direct democracy by enabling "EU citizens to participate directly in the development of EU policies"
@@teyrncousland7152 Simple reason: Putin is the main enemy. Putin wants a politically divided Europe and North America so he can achieve his goals easier.
10 หลายเดือนก่อน
@@isaks7042let's wait until Russia finally defeats Ukraine to be scared of them again.
When you look at the top 20 universities in the world, only 6 are in Europe. And all of them are in England. Which is not even in the EU. You can see why the EU is really desperate to look relevant.
"European companies" EU regulated everything, practically is impossible for a EU company to do anything really innovative ... EU startups move to UK or US to get anywhere. The EU federation will end like the Ottoman empire, which was becoming more centralized as it closed to the end.
@@najak4773 Well. Anything that is to the right from the rulling party is "far right". I even saw evident centrists being called "far right". So "far right" actualy means "not leftist enough".
yeah the whole right and left thing is stupid because politics and our planet is much more complicated to simply use 2 words to describe political views @@wzburzonykisiel
@@najak4773 actually two words may be enough for some general description of certain views. "laissez faire", "nordic model" or "national socialism" speak for themselves.
@@GuscioRossorich from the Asian child with an Asian profile picture, the UK is certainly European. Napoleon and Hitler both wanted to destroy us so what should you have us do? Sit back? Of course we went to war, and won every time. Also worth a note we don't get repeatedly invaded, they fail at the crossing the channel part each time as they will again
well if i was a native brit and i saw how my people are being replaced by every other nation in this planet i think i would be more than xenophobic @@PLF...
@@jimbodimbo981 In Waterloo did more Germans fight than Brits. The Prussian army of general Blücher had more soldiers than Wellingtons army. The Brits would’ve lost that battle without Prussia and the Prussian army.
Probably an oversimplification, but the UK was the only major country always against Napoleon, Russia and the German states supported Napoleon in stages, so if the UK didn’t push them against Napoleon then he would’ve won. The UK did also fund large parts of the coalition but yes didn’t fight too much on land themselves, so the UK led the way everywhere else except blood.
Nothing said here by GTBT was incorrect. The UK fought Napoleon more than the Prussians, Austrians and Russians. Britain wiped out the combined French and Spanish navies with no other support, liberated the Iberian peninsula - again with no support, and obviously beat Napoleon at Waterloo, the most important battle, which the Prussians would have stood no chance. Your jet-black hatred of Britain is clouding you to the historic facts.
Last time a Frenchman/Italian and a German Austrian tried to unify Europe didn't go well. This proposition was also proposed nearly a century ago with a Map outlining Europe with the worst kind of drawn borders. Not to mention trying to unify a continent with so much variety in each corner of it is nearly impossible. There needs to be a single language and forcing another other groups to just abandon their heritage won't go well. This is a nonsensical idea. Lets not forget the development level range in certain areas is higher than in others which will just create more disparities.
why would u need a single language if the current state of languages works well, also there r cases where language has gradual dialect borders between countries too
As a European I’ll tell you this. Europe is not like the states. While the states is much bigger in size & the climate in California is vastly different from New York, the same language & culture is shared between them. That is not the case in Europe. A federal Europe state would be impossible not to create but to last more than a decade or two without collapsing or falling into civil war. This is because there is no ethnic majority that holds over 50% of the continent’s population that would be necessary in order to provide unity. Instead there are multiple like French, German, Spanish, English, Italian & Polish. Put it simply a federal Europe would only be one recession away from collapse.
@satishgupta2658 My guy you clearly haven’t visited all of Europe. Good luck using English in your day to day life in France or any Baltic or Eastern European country. In the Nordic countries like Denmark & Norway yes most people do speak English but that’s not every country.
@satishgupta2658 good luck teaching a 50 year old a new language plus I don't think you'll have that much support. Many members might view that as an attempt at stripping their nationality. Look I can tell by your comments that you're from an English speaking country and haven't interacted with many people from different cultures in Europe or at least not in great detail. If you make English an official language many would view that as an attempt of removing their own language (Hungary, Greece, etc). Plus if you want to know what happens with a country with no true majority to unify them look at Yugoslavia.
@satishgupta2658culture isn't just language. Learning English didn't magically make live the way British do. Also the UK and the US share the same language but their cultures are vastly different.
@satishgupta2658 you’d have better luck trying to convince Americans to give up the second amendment than creating a whole new language and teaching it. Speaking of which America itself has become very divided politically recently almost becoming two countries in one. 2024 elections there are going to be big and will likely affect us Europeans big time whether it’s Trump or Biden we’ll certainly feel the results. I personally don’t see any candidate accepting the results so it’d be interesting to see what happens.
Germany and France should make desisions with IT, ESP and PL together cause these are biggest and most influential coutries. Also voice of smaller countries should be considered
If smaler countries’s voice is to be “ket listened “ only, the small countries leave ee, immediately. They have no other interest of remaining, than their safety. Not to leave their safety in the hands of Germany.
@@NoumenonAndPhenomenon Iceland and Norway are not interested in joing the EU Iceland because its too far away and its current economic model works it only seriously considered EU membership during the Icelandic financial crisis when Icelandic banks failed but after it switched to a tourist based economy Iceland grew faster than the Eurozone did. Norway doesn't want EU membership because it would have to give up its oil and gas profits and redistribute them to the member sates which it doesn't want to do.
as a Pole i think that Germany before the WW1 was very powerful and they were jealous that they had just a little bit compared to the UK's overseas states .Instead of colonising remote territory Germany focused too much on Germanization of Poles which brought to an adverse reaction and hatred over the next century .When Germany failed with napoleon wars in 1812 Polish felt relatively well in Germany there were a lot of rights ,polish members in German parliamentary assembly .After a while Germany were very confident when they won the war with France 1870 ,lead to nationalism and the relations between Poles and Germany were the worst in whole history between two countries.
German ans polish relations are very low at the moment, which is really bad. The axis spain, france, germany, poland, ukraine and italy are the backbone of europe. It wont work without each other
@@seb_5969 I wish we had better relations, believe me. But at this moment, I can't imagine being unified with Germany. I want Poland to stay Poland. EU is cool, and I love it. Poland benefits a lot from it (albeit less than Germany but still). But I just don't want my country to be downgraded to a "rural part of the European Federation". This whole federalisation idea in general seems to prioretise Western Europe's interests, instead of equalising the the continent, which is very much in Poland's bussiness.
@@mastercalabaster9824 we dont have to become one state or lose our identity but certain interests can only be pursued together, like Immigration and military. A european military is imo necessary, especially since the US is becoming less and less dependable.
@@wzburzonykisiel Oh, okay then. Although if a referendum were held I think it would be a good pitch in my country to get rid of the stale politics. But the real question is, who would pitch it?
EU we are stronger together let's build our future together in the face of global challenges! Together we are a superpower state that can secure a place for it self! Much more than any individual country can do alone!
My country would never join & would likely leave the EU if that was the direction things were going. I know 5 other countries that would follow for the same reason
i disliked the video though. so not to feed TH-cam algorithm with this federalist nonsense. there is no federation in the world where each of 27 states speak in different language. and for me as a citizen of a small EU nation, i do not want to be ruled by German and French.
@@nosmokejazwinski6297 OK. you forced me to put it in different way now. there is no federation in the world where each of 27 states are different ethnicity, history, tradition, religion and way of life. many things are common, but there are wast differences as well. in everything.
@@arisplugis5197 that still applies to India, tho. There are 4 major racial groups in India and at least 2 thousand ethnicities. India is much more religiously diverse than Europe. Cultures, traditions and history vary significantly from one place to another. That being said, I’m not mentioning this as a “pro EU argument” and claiming that India is a good example to follow, just saying that such federation indeed exists. I think instead of denying its existence, a better argument would be to say that India is the example why such federations are not a good thing which is debatable but at least it’s a rational argument.
The United States will not allow this. they want europe to be divided into individual countries because then every european country including germany and france must be a colony of the usa
Not necessarily, the US is getting fatigued, while they’ll dislike losing their influence especially militarily, the US is starting to reconsider whether it should be involved in international affairs at all. Having a strong Europe that can handle Russia alone, than the current situation where the US is bending for Ukraine, would probably be supported by most Americans.
@@RedwitheranI think that the influence of the United States is the main thing that prevents peace between Eastern and Western Europe...And I prefer the concept of a single European space from Lisbon to Vladivostok than the colonial status of a fragmented Europe
@@Lgstaev Most of Eastern Europe are weary of Russia and want to get away from it, until it can be trusted and open, which it is no where near right now. Western Europe and America clearly didn’t like Eastern Europe when they were communist but fully opened to them when they became democratic. The US and Europe tried with Russia, but under Putin, Russia sees the EU and US as enemies. (Yes one EU state or two might like Russia, but overall closer to the US). Russia is the main obstacle for a united Europe, the US just wants a democratic United Europe than a Russia-led autocratic one.
@@LgstaevThat's very idiotic. Russia wouldn't be democratic even if the US didn't exist. Putin labels everything European as Satanistic. Even if Russia were in the same page as Europe, they are still too big. Lovely thought of a single union including the lands that Russia currently occupies, but with or without the Americans, it wouldn't happen.
In a way no, breaking up the existing European multi ethnic nation states in smaller and smaller, weaker easily controlled countries suits the Eureaucrats divide and conquer goals. Cultural nationalism leads to more internation economical dependence. A United Belgium with its own stands in the way of a stronger Brussels.
A Federal Europe would have only worked in the early 90s when the EU was still only Western Europe. The eastern Bloc has too much cross cultural differences and honestly find the concept suspiciously similar to communism.
lol if you totally leave eastern europe to its own its gonna become part of russia and then you gonna have to deal with bigger russia not eastern europe :D welcome to real world where there are no easy and perfect decisions @@jasonhaven7170
Would only be a good idea for the EU 4, not the outlying late additions - taxpayers can't be expected to bankroll less well off citizens on the other side of the continent
In any country there are less prosperous areas as well. But you're probably not a fan of ditching such areas, right? Don't forget that most of the post 2004 members were piss poor former communist countries, some had never been independent countries before. The investment and integration of those countries with the rest of the continent made them develop and prosper massively. Concerning living standards they're not on the level of like Germany, but give it another decade and some will get close to it. And the better off these countries are the more Western Europe will profit from it as well. If you want to look at it from a selfish point of view: it's an investment that in time will really pay off.
@@zaros1781 there’s a difference between regions in your own country vs a random other EU nation, people do not share a sense of belonging in the same way no matter how much some vain politicians try to make it so simply in a desire to be equal with the US/China
Let's do a quick history lesson. In the past people identified themselves with their villages or portions of large cities they lived in (middle ages) Later people Identified themselves with the region they lived in (surrounding cities and in general the province or region) When nationalism came people identified themselves with the country itself. you could argue that Europeans are too different from each other but if you asked the Germans in 1700 if they were every going to fully unify you would be laughed at (even thought the term "german" already existed for some time). The idea of a European people already exist, people see themselves as European. you could argue the distance but nowadays you can travel from one end of Europe to the other end in far less time then people had to travel back in the day within their own country. for these reasons I believe we'll unify, it all depends on the events in the coming years and decades how quickly this will happen. for example a war against a common enemy is a great unifying factor.
A video like this one was the most recent video uploaded when I started watching this channel. Talking about a "United States of Europe". I remember hating it. Not the video itself. Just the concept. As an American I am biased against the EU in general. I wish the whole organization would fall apart. I have no doubt that, if it did unify into a federal state, a civil war would be guaranteed one day. The peoples of Europe are far too culturally segregated in their own present nations for this to work smoothly.
Why don't you americans stick your noses in your own business? Why dafaq do you hate the EU that doesn't have any impact on your life? All members are in the Union willingly and some made a huge effort to be a member because it's beneficial to all and nobody wants to leave, quite the opposite there's nations waiting for over 10 years to be approved as member. Stay in your lane. This doesn't concern you.
Europeans: "This is a complicated issue and we have to figure out how to make this work, for centuries a unified Europe has been an unattainable drea -" *American walks into the room Europeans: "Ha, this is Utopia! life is perfect, look at how fast our trains are! and hey, someone break my arm so I can get it fixed instantly and for free!" *American leaves Europeans: "Okay, seriously, how do we finally make this work?" This is basically how I envision this issue being discussed.
@@cyberfunk3793 I have been in favor of NATO for +15 years. Working together is very different than being ruled over by people. NATO is for blocking people from doing that to them through military means.
@@foss9455 Ei kyllä oo mittää hajua mitä lie tuo vois tarkottaa. Parempi niin kanssa, moni sukulaiseni uhrasi paljon tai jopa kaikkensa ettei tommosta tänne pakotettu. Ranskaa, Saksaa tai muuta ei myöskään tarvita. Elä ja anna elää.
If the EU countries ever want to truly become a superpower to rival the likes of America and China, which it seems that they do, then yes they'll have to become a singular country. I think it's a matter of when and not if, but what is truly uncertain is how soon considering the rise of the far-right that Europe is currently going through and how long that'll last.
One of the best documentaries on the origin of European Union. Only I'm having a hard time with understanding the accent. Constantly rewinding and listening again.
in June 2024, elections to the European parliament will most likely shift the majority to right-wing parties and a tendency to more nationalistic governments can be expected too. any enlargement of the EU will require it to first change its decision making process. it also adds more diversity and strain to the system. the idea of a European 'Federal State' gets ever more elusive the more members join the union. therefore, the French president already vented the idea of a *multi-speed Europe.* those who favour their national state could remain on the outer skirts of the union while those who wish for an 'ever closer union' are allowed to proceed too. however, the treaties don't allow for this yet and need to get amended or changed. nobody knows how this will end and when? good luck! the world is watching.
The problem with such a system has proven itself by brexit already. EU has no problems punishing and making it as difficult and painful as possible to leave the union. The thing with power consolidation is that it becomes a black hole. It becomes voracious and wants more. It will look good on paper.. but that black hole will slowly start to tear and bring everything in its orbit closer. Those in the center would make up policies that only favours those in the center, at the expense for those at the rim, effectively it becomes a carrot and whip scenario. Do as we say and join the fold, or you will find yourself recieving the whip more. And if you dare to leave, well.. just look at what we did with GB.. imagine what we will do to you.
One extremely big factor for the question whether Europe will become a Republic or not is the result of the first europe-wide party 'Volt' in the upcoming European elections!
They seem to be full-on woke, so they alineate the majority of the population from the start. They won a few seats in the Dutch parliament and have been internally fighting ever since. (Woke people are not nice to each other.)
Well done. As usual. Your ending was rational and open-ended for a reason. The almighty “unknown”…. As an American, there can be no stability in Europa(or the world) until the R.F. is defeated. Ukraine must “win” for Europe to coalesce into stability, prosperity and peace. Slava Ukraine! From Boston and Seattle, USA
Yes, if russia "win" ( no body win, it is not a football match ppl die ), there can be stability just do like every country on earth and negotiate. Either way, since ukraine (as of right now ) is clearly on the backfoot, we will be forced to deal with Russia
In framing a government, which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty is this: You must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place, oblige it to control itself. The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. - President James Madison
@@MysteryKmt yeah so you break up the federal gov and institute a system of checks and balances. The US has done a good job to ensure this, and while it may mean legislation passes at very slow rates, the risk of overbearing government is reduced significantly. Not perfect, but it's worked for 250 years.
Two minor corrections to your excellent narrative: yes France was always ensuring to have a decent place in the European construction BUT the REAL issue at the time - also shared by Italy and Benelux countries - was to prevent a too powerful Germany to rise again and stage war. Another correction: the UK was invited to participate to this early stages of the European construction but declined it because the UK was more interested by an economic alliance and hated the idea of a sort of political union and defense union which was around in the 50s.
Hungary definately will be never part of any kind of USSR like imperial adventure - it was enough only once. And of course it is doomed from the first moment. EU is only an economic coorporation, but so different culturally - never a french or german or polish will gave up it's own culture for some non-existing european pseudo- "cullture" . And creating another Rome is not a wise idea, because Imperiums are restricted in time by nature. But nation states can survive always.
Structure doesn't resembe USSR much at all, nor like rome. Nationalism is a plauge though. Independant states , integrated states are both fine though. Nation states have only existed for the last few centuries and are likely a short lived wreched historical anomoly.
@@Sara3346 You cannot be independent under a federal umbrella. The examples are wrong, because both Switzerland or Germany have a common swiss or german cultural and national identity. EU dont have. EU even nowadays trying to resemble a centralized authoritarian structure, which totally careless about the souvereign interests of the nations, especially on the perifery. Meanwhile still the present EU have balances (unanomity law for example), to trying to compensate smaller states. Present EU I wouldn't call USSR, but this imagined futuristic federal imperial EU very easily. Even a cohesive ideology would not be missing, and this would also be closely related to Marxism, just as neoliberalism (nothing to do with the real Millian liberalism) is related to communism... And come on: the European seed is the Westfalian idea of nation states! Calling that "historical anomaly" is something what I read on my childhood schoolbooks, when marxists explained the history on the communist Hungary..😀
@@jasonhaven7170 Just in your pink dreams, dear bolshevik. Hungary will saving the EU from this wrong steps towards federalism. And if Hungary not be able to save them, doesn't matter, because the EU in this form stop to exist. For federalism they need to create a totally new agreement with each members, and all the members will be free will to decide, they want to jump into the dark or not. In this case 1000%, not Hungary will be the only one, who will reject. But as I see the movements, EU citizens very divided in this question. Even the liberal conservative parties (European Peoples Party) don't want to hear about federalist Europe! But you guys on the left, need to learn some basic democracy and tolerancy - to not want to kick out immediately everybody, who have different opinion than yours. And learn some basic, how the EU working, and no such mechanism to kick out anybody.
As an individual don't do it! the farther away your leading government is the less it cares about you. It's going to be more of "the greater good". Many Americans actively want to revert from a federalized system to more localized governments that they can feel their voice is actually heard and matters.
No worries, in EU the individual voice is more important than in the states. We don’t have to listen the lesser of two evils. As you can see the parliament is extremely diverse in political ideas and representation
@@kodakomp Wel yes every member can be represented equally without having a VETO. And currently there’s only about 10 points a VETO can be used by any country. 1: taxation; 2: the finances of the Union (own resources, the multiannual financial framework); 3: harmonisation in the field of social security and social protection; 4: certain provisions in the field of justice and home affairs (the European prosecutor, family law, operational police cooperation, etc.); 5: the common foreign and security policy, with the exception of certain clearly defined cases; 6: the common defence policy,; 7: citizenship (the granting of new rights to European citizens, anti-discrimination measures) The resolution proposes to extend the number of areas for which joint member state decisions are taken by a qualified majority vote instead of unanimously. We have the council (one member of each country) and vote by double majority A qualified majority is reached if two conditions are simultaneously met: 55% of member states vote in favour - in practice this means 15 out of 27 the proposal is supported by member states representing at least 65% of the total EU population or Reinforced qualified majority. To reach a reinforced qualified majority if two conditions are simultaneously met: at least 72% of member states vote in favour - in practice this means at least 20 out of 27 member states supporting the proposal represent at least 65% of the EU population. The president of the council is rotated every 6 months. Parliament is proportionally represented and no single state can have a majority, the biggest voting share. Germany with the most MEPs barely have 13% of the seats. France have 11~% and Netherlands have 4~% and Denmark have 2~% The coalition lead by Netherlands however is made up of 18.5% of the seats. A coalition lead by Germany have 21% of the seata and a coalition lead by Denmark have 13% of the seats All the while a French MEP is the president of the parliament.
@@alkatrosberner624 I do know how the EU works. I just value and appreciate the EU project. And I want it to federalize for my and our benefit. And you imply something I stated was wrong, can you mention what that is?
It's been a rough year with losses from failed banks and government, real estate crashes, a struggling economy, and downturns in stocks and dividends. It feels like everything has been going wrong. What a terrible year it is…
It is always good to have a financial plan. I work with a professional planner and fixed-income strategist in NY. The fixed income portion of your portfolio won't simply serve as a buffer to the volatility of the equity portion of your portfolio, but will provide legitimate income.
I'm not sure I fully agree with this analysis. It seems a little to focused on great man theory of development. And while certain characters of course have more influence in things, it is important to remember that other nations could still be pretty significant and for a long time had a veto on many a decision. Not to mention at times proposals actually came from the smaller countries because they deemed in to be a favorable development for themselves, the larger whole or both. For instance this analysis proposes nothing much happened between the vote system change and now. But this isn't actually the case. If one looks internally then one would find that over this period the EU slowly started to acquire increasing defense spending powers. First in just cooperative arrangements, then in funding dual technology development and with Ukraine even some direct military funding support for Ukraine. Another element of interest here is how France and Germany continued some further integration of military industry between each other. For instance exemplified in the merger of the German and French tank manufacturers in to one. Other countries also have had some level of consolidation happen, so it isn't even just a matter of these countries alone. As such I'm some what dubious of the exact claimed reason and motivations for the EU development as it is. It seems far more likely to think that many parties have been busy unifying bits and pieces of Europe over time, simply because they were running less effectively and efficiently at a national level. Like for instance the expenses of developing next generation weapons. This seems to fit much better then a flawed great man argument in the matter. A position that is also somewhat disrespectful to other states influence in the union, as can also clearly be seen in their at times quite sizeable representation numbers. And truthfully the argument presented only seems even more unlikely when one considers the expansion of the EU only further waters down France and Germany total share of the EU.
It's nice that you mentioned a common German-French tank, I think the Italians also joined. It's good that you mentioned helping Ukraine. However, Poland had been trying for over 10 years to join the production of the French-German and Italian tank, but each time it was refused. Poland received the answer that they could buy this tank at best and not get involved in production. Similarly, when it comes to aid for Ukraine, the first military and lethal equipment from Germany arrived in Ukraine only after 11 months of fighting. Not to mention the fact that the German ambassador in the first days of the war said that it was not worth helping Ukraine because it would fall in a few days.
@@bobstone0 I'm well aware of these matters, yes. Though the previous Polish government didn't gain itself much trust, considering the political shenanigans they tried to play. Why would anyone trust a tank program to some one playing shenanigans with them, there's enough political complexities between countries with out that kind of headache and potential delay. And aid wise, interestingly enough Germany has turned out to be more reliable then Poland. Where towards the end the previous Polish government suddenly did a 180 and suddenly cut off direct aid. Germany meanwhile has literally doubled down and has further increased direct military aid to twice the previous budget at 8 billion. Though they've also allowed their military industry to start building facilities in Ukraine now as well, something Poland hasn't done either. And they've said that in case it seems like Ukraine gets in to to much trouble they are willing to declare an emergency and take loans to keep Ukraine afloat. So oddly enough, we're now in a situation where Poland reduced aid, while Germany has turned out to go even more all in then Poland ever did. So seems they take things pretty seriously indeed now. I guess we'll see how things go from here though. Maybe the new Polish government will increase aid again after all.
@@Quickshot0 Nonsense! this is your knowledge of the world. The rejection of joint cooperation in the construction of the tank took place in the years 2007-2015, i.e. during the pro-German government that returned to power today, in 2023. The new Polish government from 2015-2022 did not even raise this issue, which is why it purchased tanks from Korea and the USA. Because the great Germans will not share with anyone. I have never seen bigger lies and nonsense about German aid. German calculations show promises as already fulfilled orders. In these calculations, Polish tanks of Soviet design are valued at $0.50 each, and German helmets at $300 each. I will not comment on the words "political intrigues", it is fascist left-wing propaganda, when someone is conservative, he is evil, stupid, hurts children, women, gays and destroys the German-Russian agreement. The devil in human skin. Why is your knowledge 100% lies, even Russians don't lie like that, because they usually lie 90%. The Polish government did not block aid! Are you crazy? are you writing from the hospital? It was farmers who opposed the transport of agricultural products that did not meet the standards and requirements imposed by the EU. The Germans also did everything not to give up the tanks, they came up with more and more stupid requirements and gave an ultimatum that they would not send tanks to Ukraine unless the USA did it too. Olaf Scholz must have been very surprised when the Americans said there was no problem and they would send the Abrams to Ukraine. This is my last message to you. Because I don't have the strength to get angry at bad and stupid people. Germany delayed helping because it wanted Ukraine to fall. Because the German government did not want to break off business and trade contacts with Russia. And if Ukraine actually fell in 3 days, everyone would just say, "well, Russia is powerful, you have to deal with it", and at the very end the left-fascist media would start criticizing Poland and inventing lies. That Poles are striving for war and doing everything wrong, while Russia would make further demands for NATO to revert to the pre-1999 levels.
@@Quickshot0 Germany should pay Poland reparation to the tune of 1 trillion Euros for World War II damages :) the Communist government treaties dont count because they were Moscows puppets at the time.
Just a thought, but wouldn't it be easier to make a new federal EU and only invite countries that wish to join that federation and leave the old alliance-monetary union EU? Instead of complicated and numerous treaties, etc, there can be a constitution drafted by founders and amendable by an easier process (no veto, maybe ⅔ vote in ⅔ of member-states, or maybe ⅘ vote of all federal EU citizens)? Those that didn't want the new federal EU could stay in the old one, albeit smaller version after the countries in favour of federation left.
necessity for who? EU fanatics in Brussels, or the people of Europe. The desire to be equal with the US/China is simply vanity which most people do not even think or care about.
@@ironczar8975 nato is too reliant on the US. The european countries spend a lot of money on the military, but it is too inefficient with many different headquarters
Why do you care about your country? Your country's independence doesn't change anything for your day to day life (maybe very minimaly). If the EU doesn't federalize we will just get behind china and the US without any chance of competing with them.
As much as europeans are alike they are different so this is not realistic because everyone would look after their best interest, the strong gets the cake and the less gets the crumbles, we are already seeing this today where france and germany are splitting up europe grabbing their share of what can be grabbed, trying to lead... just leads to much fighting.
I dont really want many more new members. I feel with so many voices to agree things grind to a halt or slow down by allot. Maybe 2 or 3 smaller unions could get more done
@@arisplugis5197 It could work like in USA where smaller states get disproportionally more voting power based on their population, but not a complete veto on every important matter. Otherwise it leaves EU completely impotent on important matters if some wannabe putins little dictator (totally not hungary) gets to sabotage the whole union
@@sergeantzack1106 why would onel love something that has no function? There is no shared identity to stick out of love and there is no problem that requires an organization like this. A Eurostate will not improve the commerce further and won't alter the fact that its industrial base requires resources from elsewhere. The only capital that we had, high levels of trust, social reliability, good education, will be destroyed as it is already ongoing. Social experimentation will amplify and that's why some people love it. However, this is pathology against which Europe was more resistant when in single nationhoods.
@@alodwich Jesus bcs the population is ageing and NATO is going to the toilet with the Republicans, and Russia will take it over if we don't get serious.
@@alodwich Pax Americana is pretty much over and the world is becoming a more and more dangerous place we have to stick together and unite to survive the coming decades
Amazing video. In the past, federalization was just a tool for France to keep its supremacy. The fact that France and Germany keep pushing for this project is concerning. We must have a stronger union of democratic member states. Not a federalized super-state.
I predict the far right is going to win the EU elections coming June. The EU is just too undemocratic and too non-transparent for the larger population to stomach.
A Federal Europe should be modeled after the Swiss model of Federated Participatory Democracy. Member nations should be divided into Cantons from pre-existing subnational divisions (like Germany's Bundeslander or France's departaments), with the "Nations" existing between the Cantons and the Federal goverment with only the powers given to them by their constituent Cantons.
I was arguing a federal Europe cannot exist as long as the nations exist not that long ago. And now someone proposes stripping nations away more. That was quick. I guess the next step after this will be arguing for only having Cantons, and that is where the communities will be dragged to.
@@jascrandom9855 Switzerland is a tiny mostly homogenous state you might be mislead to thinking it equally speaks French Italian and German when over 70% of Swiss citizens speak German as their first language with everyone else given minority rights. the Swiss cantons decide their own migration policy and who to let into the canton and even labor laws are different between each Canton. For example if you want to be a lawyer in Switzerland you have to get legally certified as a lawyer in each Canton to practice law. its similar to the U.S in that aspect but in Switzerland each canton has differing educational standards and employment requirements. everything but Foreign Policy is dictated by Swiss Cantons. The Federal council Is also very divided politically and only 3 parties are represented at the federal level.
![[Live] : ONE 169 วันนี้!! "อนาโตลี vs อูมาร์"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/IK3YZVWuFJg/mqdefault.jpg)
![“อ.เบียร์ คนตื่นธรรม” มาตามคำเรียกร้อง แหกศาสตร์ฮวงจุ้ย เตือนสติอย่างมงาย | แฉ 7 พ.ย. 67 [1/3]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/5fc4S3xBNfc/mqdefault.jpg)
🟢 Try Speakly with first 7 days for free and get 60% discount on an annual subscription: speakly.app.link/goodtimesbadtimes
📌 Support GTBT on Patreon! www.patreon.com/GTBT
➡ Paypal: www.paypal.com/paypalme/GoodTimesBadTimes
End the eu empire! Free Czechia, free Slovakia, free Hungary, free Poland, free Italia, free Britannia!
Utopia. Different languages and cultures bring to a new Jugoslavia. It will never happen.
To put it simply. Federal EU would not happen! (at least for now) Thing is that France and Germany proved to be ineffective in ruling Europe. They compliance with Russia, is major issue. Europe was not fully in vassalage of Putin, only because majority of EU countries actually hold sane approach and counter it. Whole Federal project is only serving purpose of restoring Franco-German dominance, instead actually repairing issues of Europe.
i think European federation idea wouldn't be supported in national referendum. why giving even more sovereignty away?
so i had to dislike this video. because i dislike federation idea.
@@TheRezro the Franco-German dominance does not exist, since they would be rivals. In human history, two major powers clash each other for dominance. No agreement would happen. Least but not last: the other countries would not accept to be ruled by one of them.
Ironically this EU superstate would not have been possible with UK in it because UK would veto it.
you understand whats Federal Level ,right? @@sigiloXXX
Good thing they left then. They won't be missed.
Uk would become the Matriarch of CANUK
@@JT.Pilgrim CANUK isnt happening ever it was only just a weird fantasy of some of the terminaly online Brexit fans who couldnt cope with how badly they screwed up
@@alexanderrose1556 it looks like UK is joining CPTPP quite soon though.
I would like to know who our europeans leaders are. I think 80% of People have no idea whats going on in european parliament
I'm pro EU and that's a good critique! People should be more informed of what goes on! Agreed, mate.
@@Gio-ym4uj Me too, rightwing but very pro EU.
And its a challenge because even following politics on the national level feels like a full time job already. 😂
The internet is nice for such things. Just look it up. Everything is explained and written down
@@fischersfritz468 I get your point. But people can barely keep track of politics within their country and that gets much more media attention than whatever EU does. Yet the EU train keep rumbling on so im in favor of governments creating more awareness
This is actually a result of a loose union. People care about politics only when it affects them. Since EU politics affect you less than national politics, you care only about national politics. But if the EU parliament would have a clearer and bigger impact on your life then, EU elections would be more interesting. Like how mostly nobody knows or cares about their local mayor or knows who their representative is, but they know the PM/President.
For those of you who felt that the conclusion was too short and did not give answers to still valid questions - sorry, we would break the 1 hour mark. But we'll try to find them and answer in early 2024. Why is the EU lagging behind? What are the main obstacles for Europe to catch up with the US or China? Is it possible to overcome them by bringing together all European interests? We will try to make an honest, supranational reflection.
You forgot to add Montenegro
From my perspective, 51 minutes, 60 minutes, not that much difference. Does TH-cam suppress videos above an hour long?
@@Chexmaster What about Montenegro?
The EU is the problem
bot @@garyb455
Im kinda dissappointed that you skipped Brandt and Schmidt. Especially sine Schmidt was a Eurofederalist who built the groundwork of the Euro with Giscard
agree but please regard that you could make an 1 hour documentary about each of them and the video is already 50 minutes long
@@capslocked7274 fair but skipping the 70s is just weird
@@trollon1232
I betcha it came down to time management….
It’s always hard to achieve.
They already mentioned it in previous video.
And? This is supposed to be a full summary of eurofederalism. So its strange to skip germanys only Eurofederalist chancellors
In June I was at the EYE2023 conference in Strasburg. I was honestly surprised to see there special areas and tents promoting the federalization of EU. A conference for European Youth should have a big diversity of views and discussions on these topics, but the feeling I left with, as a Romanian working and living in Poland, is that their vision of what EU is and what is should be is very different in the west of the continent.
While for us here the EU is a tool to reach the objective of a better living and economic development, the westerners I've met there had the opinion that the EU is the final objective, to promote and enforce certain values.
Then u havent talked to anyone outside large cities.
I wasnt aware of those tents but it doesnt surprise me, I will be voting for whatever party is against federalisation.
you know very well that back in Romania politicians are corrupt as f, so we need rules and holds in place to get rid of corruption because local corrupt politicians wont change those rules that made them rich. Only this way Romania can prospere, eliminating corruption. So a federal EU its absolutely necessary! Cheers from a Romanian living in UK
So, if you were in the UK, would you support the "handing over" of the control of the UK's National Interest to a Federal EU ?
@@havencat9337unfortunately the EU itself is deeply corrupt and getting more so
What citizens think the EU is for is radically different from what those in the top positions of power in the EU think. They don't care about values or economic growth, except as how those things can be used to leverage their own power. They use that power to sideline competitors (France>UK) and the freedom to wield it as they see fit, and to hell with the people.
Being American, I've never heard this part of European history summarized before. Well done.
This channel sounds like Soros shills and corrupt corporate media propagandist.
Being american, u prolly thought europe was in jupiter
Being American, you already thought Europe is a country
To be fair, Europe doesn't have much oil
Imagine an alternate universe where there is a Unites States of Europe and they are arguing against the American Union becoming a federation arguing membee-state sovereignty, and fearing the anti-ch--t, etc.
A yes, the Unholy German-Franco-Hispanic-Italic..x.x.x.x....(takes breath)...and finnish confederation. Truly a classic of european history to be.
Sequel to the Finno-Korean hyperwar?
Cant await to see it lmao
The germanic-latin-oriental-slavic federal union of europe
I think a great comparison can be made with the states of the Indian Union. Though most are majority Hindu now, their customs, language and culture do vary considerably. The individual states as independent countries would hardly be considered important on a global state. But India, as the Indian Union, does feature heavily in the global stage. The citizens of smaller EU countries need to ask themselves the question, of how irrelevant their countries will become on the global stage without a unified European State acting as a super-power on its own.
The two choices are independence but irrelevance OR
Closer integration into a federal state with the rights and opportunities presented by being a citizen of a superpower, albeit with some loss of independence for individual states.
As for the baltic states fearful of western European miscalculations on Russian advances, it must be noted the response from Brussels would be far more robust if the Baltic countries sovereignty was directly in its interest as part of greater European superstate (defending themselves) vs the sovereignty of an allied partner (defending others).
The "smaller" european countries will be made irrelevant in the EU also. Their interests will be sold out to the highest bidder, their territories will be just a buffer to bargain with outside powers. There is no solidarity within Europe, there are only interests of states, and we have just given even more strength to the strongest ones.
As an American, I agree that Europe must come together, but I believe there still must be cultural autonomy, but I believe in one foreign policy and military for Europe. For my country America, I believe in something similar. A synthesis of autonomous states with Freedom of Association and One Foreign Policy and Federal Military.
🥳🥳😭🥳🥳😭🥳😭🥳😪🥳😭😪🥳😭😪🥳😭😭😭🥳😭😭
L
L
If my country is going to lose independence to a European State then it will become irrelevant either way. So it it is not a choice between independence or irrelevance. But between being independent and irrelevant (and the level of this irrelevance is very much debatable depending on the country) or losing independence and relevance as long as you are not German or French.
Also, the creation of the European Federation doesn't guarantee that all its citizens will be treated fairly and equally. I am not risking becoming a second-class citizen in a bureaucratic nightmare run by people who will look down on me because I wasn't born in Western Europe.
The only way to have a properly functioning federal system is to renounce the idea of a two-speed Europe and come to terms with the potential prospect of Germany and France losing their leading role on the continent to Eastern Europe and countries such as Poland, Romania, etc. This will never happen, however, because Eastern Europe playing the role of a pariah of the West and Russia is the norm for Western politicians and this will not change. The form of federalization of Europe presented by Germany and France is only to tighten their influence on the continent and centralize the European economy in Berlin and Paris, naturally excluding smaller countries. Talking about equality and unity in Europe in this state of affairs is nothing more than a lie and in the end it will end with the collapse of the idea of European integration and increasing divisions.
WWII was a further Germanization effort of Europe's breadbasket
You have stated the truth here
Why would France and Germany with a combined GDP of 7 trillion usd and 150 million people renounce to leading the EU? Why would small and poor eastern europe lead anything, if west of the Oder River you have 2/3rds-ish of the EU population?
@@FOLIPE Russia should join in and Balance the whole thing out :) ironically the EU needs Russia if it is to survive and compete against China and the U.S Siberia will allow the EU to stop being neocolonialist and loot resources from Africa and turn to exploiting Siberia which would on EU soil subject to EU laws and regulations.
@@FOLIPEwhy would a federal europe happen without giving the east more power?
@FOLIPE Like I said they won't. However, it is somewhat foolish. Germany and France want to compete with US and China's economy and They cannot do it o their own. When they talk about catching up to the rest, they talk about the EU catching up, not them catching up.
They need the whole Europe, to be able to compete, which means they need "small nad poor Eastern Europe". They need their manpower, their potential and economy to unify Europe's economy. That's the only way to compete with the rest.
However, Eastern Europe won't accept these terms because they know that France and Germany needs them and they know that they supposed to be second class for them. They know their potential and that over time, they can have a strong voice on the continent. For example, Poland as a country is not "small and poor" anymore. Warsaw, in a level of development resembles Western capitals. Their GDP still grows rapidly and they have the potential to have a bigger influence on the continent. And they know it. That's why, if Germany and France want Federal Europe, a unified and functioning federal Europe, they would have to agree with Eastern Europe's national interests and let them strengthen themselves in order to call their offer favorable for these nations.
Fundamentally, you either HAVE a hegemon, or you ARE a hegemon. Divided, the individual EU states have a hegemon (most of the time the US, sometimes France or Germany), united the EU would BE the hegemon.
You either wield the knife or lie on the stone and I would much rather be the one that wields the knife, than to be butchered on the stone.
Nope.
Do you really think Germany and France would give up their hegemony? It would upgrade their hegemony even more.
@@wzburzonykisiel How?
@@MajinOthinus Why do you think the French or German would be better overlords than the Americans. The Americans will always control the seas.
Such exploitation is not best defeated by a super state
@@wzburzonykisiel We would absolutely give up power towards pretty much any guy from every country in the EU. In fact, once this federation would be achieved Germany fro example would go back to sleep, and just do business and only minimal engagement in politics.
It is also your union. It is your power that you can shape and form. However, you have to be European if you want that position. You have to be there for all europeans.
You Eastern Europeans hide in your country and especially with your population difference that makes you invisible.
You want this power? You want to be most on top of the world? Do it like Kallas.
Give press conferences in other countries, talk to the large population of Western Europe. Don't be afraid to create visibility by mingling into other countries affairs. Your name sounds polish to me: You think it would be wrong to go to Germany, Italy, Slovenia, Spain to talk to local electorate and mingle in other countries politics. NO. You are allowed to do that, and if you present solutions, you can shape the union and lead the union, BUT, your strict nationalism prevents that!
I think that realistically it would be much more convenient if, within the European Union 🇪🇺, the four main economies (Germany 🇩🇪, France 🇫🇷, Italy 🇮🇹 and Spain 🇪🇸) had greater cooperation and coordination with each other on key issues such as security, defense, trade or new technologies. This way Europe could compete in better conditions against other world powers such as the United States 🇺🇸, China 🇨🇳 or India 🇮🇳.
oh, so a non-democratic eu then? just the most powerful have a voice? no thank you. democratic federation, yes. this youre saying? no.
They need to do something about the educated leaving their Italian and Spanish home countries and taking all that intellectual capital with them.
@@templecreations2351 Fck a federation. An Imperium and an Emperor who will treat all countries as if they were his own children.
I cant see why nordic countries would ever join that. Nordics are way too storng to be pushed around by Italy and Spain.
@@Schwarzie10 I cant talk about Italy. But Spain is starting to change that, specially in IT, many graduates find jobs in spanish or international companies but living in Spain.
We have a brain drain problem? Yes.
Specially in the top (CEO's, great scientist, etc...) But last 5 years we have improve and in fact Spain is slowly starting to attract international talent more and more.
If rural europeans think they currently are ignored while faraway bureaucrats fawn over urban areas (and their densely populated voting blocks), imagine how forgotten you will be if the government is responsible for the entire continent.
Finest of arguments
While it is sad that rural areas is forgotten, it is understandable why it is that way. Because most people live in urban areas that will also be prioritized by politicians.
I say that if you feel forgotten by your government, then move to a place where you...don't? Besides, feeling like your government isn't doing enough is a completely subjective thing to feel, like what do you mean by that?
Do you mean forgotten as in "the buildings in my community are made of balsa wood, duct tape, and dreams. Godzilla came through here 5 minutes ago and I have 4 different waterborne diseases and 30 peasant children to feed after they come back from their 20 hour shift in the coal mines." ?
Or do you mean forgotten as in "boohoo I lost my job, must be the government's fault and totally not because I harassed 5 female interns at my workplace and hurled racial slurs like cluster munitions." ?
I think that if you choose to live in a rural place you have no right to complain about the government because you literally live in a place where there is little government. Do rural people really want the entire government to come to Joe's rustic cabin in the middle of the woods for a sleepover? No. Lots of people who choose to live in rural areas live there because they don't want government around. They just want their little farm and some peace and quiet away from everything. I think that if you choose to live that way then you have to come to terms with the fact that little Timmy won't be getting an Oxford education in Ruralsville: population 6.
What I'm saying is: expect to be left alone, and expect to not get any help or opportunity when you live in a place with no people around. No people = You're on your own, good luck.
If you don't like that burden, *psst* ᵐᵒᵛᵉ ᵗᵒ ᵃ ᶜᶦᵗʸ
Apparently, that's where all the jobs are.
@@zericle1You're projecting hard there about harassing female coworkers. Got something to share buddy? And what if I don't wish to move? I feel just as patriotic for my small town as I do for my country. Additionally, what you're proposing is simply stupid. Rural areas produce food, if everyone moves away from the countryside into the city, then from where do you get food, genius?
@@doktorhabilitowanystanczyk Thanks for insinuating that I harass women, that was very nice and adult of you. I really love waking up to see that, that made my day!
You seem to think that I hate rural people, that's not true at all. In fact, since you seem to think you know me so much and really want me to share something with you, so I'll let you in on a secret.
I was on a farm at one point in my life. But I didn't like it, I hated it actually, and so I moved to the city a few years ago. Doing that helped me very much, I was able to get away from a lot of bad shit, able to go to college, and I was able to find job opportunities I wouldn't find back where I used to live. And that's why I'm a smart ass.
You also think food is only grown in the countryside, also not true. The wonders of hydroponics, am I right?
You gotta laugh a little, you're bumming everyone out. Can't read between the lines, hates attempts at comedy, negative about this and that...
I know I may be a little crass, and sarcastic, and yeah some people don't like that, but you gotta be that way when people are seething, and angry, and serious all the time, when you live around liars, hypocrites, just general negativity, and all that bullshit.
My mom taught me the importance of turning the other cheek, and being polite, so...
I hope you have a nice day. and I'm sorry if you feel bad, that quite literally wasn't my intention, you know? I was just trying to make some people laugh and give some advice based on my own experiences and quirkiness, as you do time to time in the comments.
I guess you can't please everyone. Ah well.
For this to happen, EU needs a common link language that needs to be enforced in member countries for the purposes of Administration, Higher education, Judiciary, Jobs, Banking services, etc. Companies do not want to rely on leniency of countries but rather look for "official common link language" status. There are other big markets like USA which has English, China which has Standard Mandarin, India which has English, etc. So EU has the option to create a common link language (English) or become irrelevant in near future.
We need a unified Europe to survive the 21st century. Europe is getting older and smaller (not in physical size ofc). What chance does a loose union of micronations have in a century dominated by economic titans?
I think we should start with all states that want in on a United States of Europe and leave it up to the rest if they want to join in sooner or later. Smaller States (like the Czech Republic, Austria and Hungary) will soon see that surviving as small states will be next to impossible. We have to adapt or we will slowly wither away. Do we want to leave the future to the Chinese or the Americans? That is a question we Europeans have to face. Do we want to see our lands slowly becoming more and more impoverished? We already see the writing on the walls, with shops closing everywhere, Inflation and rising taxes and costs of living. This will only become worse if we leave it up to the U.S. or China, because they can write the rules while we are forced to play their games.
no, we want to leave the future to the europeans, worst colonizators in history
Problem is, a federation of the kind that the EU leaders dream about is essentially impossible. It could happen in a couple of hundred years sure, or with conquest. But not with the multicultural, weak culture of the EU leaders. Which vision are they trying to sell? Being ruled from Brussels by un-elected commissars? No common religion or culture? They simply do not have a vision, nothing to sell other than better regulation. Most Europeans want to keep their identity, and independence in the matters that are not currently ruled by EU. The only reason federations (empires) work, is due to violence and cultural supremacy. Anything else is a pipe-dream.
Traditional empires generally allowed a wide degree of sovereignty to their subjects. usually revolving around paying a tribute and providing troops and allegiance.
They are trying to make melting pot with mixing bunch of different people in Europe as we speak. You cant travel over the border unless you are paperless migrant lol
@@goldbullet50 yeah but they crashed rebellions by force and over time forced cultural assimilation or face annihilation how do you think China became 99% Han Chinese? China was never a ethno state and the Han homeland is only alongside the Yellow river and not much more.
@@covfefe1787 "Han" is basically like "European" in the sense of ethnicity... Many Han subgroups speak mutually non-intelligible languages, about as similar with each other as the big European languages. Only about 2/3 of Han speak (some variety of) Mandarin as their first language. And Mandarin itself, with all its varieties, is more like a big language family in Europe like Slavic, Germanic, or Romance rather than a single European language.
Whereas "Chinese" is like "European" in the sense of living in Europe.
@@hyhhy g
Good lord.
That is a stretch…..”Han” is like “European”…
Two “polar” opposite cultures. Literally.
Throw in a dash of CCP/Communist/Soviet influence and ya’ got European.
🫡😆
The biggest political problem in Europe is a question: where does the EU end and sovereignity begin? Everything depends on answering this! I think that this should be publicly discussed and various ideas put forward in the public arena. It's far past time for this as all too soon other things will need to be done. This could well include a European Army and probably Navy and Airforce. This goes well into
to sovereign matters. There could be others like perhaps horizontal fiscal equalization. Also quite possibly foreign policy issues.It's worth pointing out the history of many of these countries is one of war going back more than a thousand years. It's got some good points such as standardised trade rules and allows for big dollar projects like the Baltic states railroad and probably to Finland . Various political models and how this would be done must be discussed. there is a real fear of countries being reduced to a province akin to say Wyoming in the USA no disrespect meant. There is also the possibility of countries having seriously dissenting views on say a war with Russia. such a situation requires a definite command structure vis a vis the EU and the individual states. Who is going to have that authority? There are messier questions like should nuclear weapons be made and its command structure. I am not trying to tell anyone what to do ,I just ask that people start to think about all this, whether it's at work, home, in their respective leglistures and at the EU Level. The decisions made today may impact the next few hundred years.
You imply being part of a larger federation like the EU means you inherently lose sovereignty on a national level. Sovereignty is not a zero-sum game. It's also not intrinsic to a nation. Sovereignty is what's awarded to you by your neighboring nations through either your diplomatic efforts or through your show of force. Just declaring to be sovereign on your own is only granting you 'your' sovereignty until someone else just casually decides to waltz in. Ask 19th century Japan about that.
For example if you're a small country, isolated and on your own, you can't expect to be able to put any political weight into any scale when played by any of the major powers (US, China, and a host others, depending on your size). You can scream what you want, try to get the U.N. to listen to you all you want. In the end all your 'sovereignty' will be for naught. In practice, you won't have any of it. Ask Georgia and the Chechens, ask many an African nation, ask pretty much any member of the Warsaw pact when that pact existed. And if the E.U. may ever break, ask any European nation, including the big ones. Of the two that may make a dent wholly on their own, one of them is currently locked in an existential crisis of 'warrific' proportions (Ukrain) and the other has too messy politics and other instabilities it will currently not be able to fend for its own (Turkye). The other 'great' European nations are too weak to even consider. Yes, that includes 'Great' Britain (political mess and historical and current class squabbles splitting the population), France (integration problems from a still looming colonial past), Germany (the cultural after-effects of WW2) and if I'd add any other nation to that list, Poland is the first one that comes to mind, but Poland has the problem it's Poland. The land consists of a completely indefensible plain that can be easily invaded from their coast, the east and the west.
If the Russ^h^h^h^hMuscovites would enter one of the E.U. states and they would not be united at all (either through the E.U. or through NATO), they will have easy pickings. Not only for the Baltics, Also Finland won't hold, neither will Poland (despite their efforts)... They'll have free reign up to the harbor of Rotterdam and then have the option to go south if they want so.
So don't talk about insular sovereignty unless you are committed to defend that sovereignty with your blood and bones. For anyone that's willing to corporate, you can share your sovereignty with each other through the setup of well thought out governmental structures, which I expect the E.U. institutions to provide for its citizens. And the E.U. can expect in return I will participate (vote) in them accordingly. That way I know my sovereignty is secure.
Economic Union is desirable and should stay.
Military cooperation and protection is also desirable.
EU enforcing regulations such as on quality of food, and manufactured products being sold in the EU territory is also good.
The EU should never meddle in local culture, such as by enforcing an official language or banning another language. No one state within the federation should be favoured in language, economy, or political power.
@@norielgames4765 That is why you should actively work towards your goals. We are at the beginning of something big, every decision we make now on how to federalize (or otherwise to disband) will kick off a tornado in the future. Right now the world atmosphere is so volatile, you can truly make history!
@@blackhole3298 thing is, decisions are almost always bad when you make them without knowing, so there should be a lot of discussion about this
LOl you a muppet@@norielgames4765
I think it is only possible through two-tier Europe. Let say 20 countries decided to federalize and form a single country European Federation which is going to be part of existing status-quo European Union with other 7 countries that decided not to federalize. Then non-EU countries can join status-quo European Union if all 8 members approve with existing procedure or join European Federation with approval of only European Federation basing on the established precedent when East Germany joined West Germany and thus future EU without any asking for unanimous vote from EU members.
In other words Western Europe becomes one state whilst Eastern Europe stays connected but not as single
Without Switzerland it won't be a Federal European Union and not possible therefore.
Canada has much more in common with the USA, than any 2 European neighbors. Why does nobody expect Canada to join the US? That will be same answer, against Euro federalist nonsense.
Oh great, even more bureaucracy.
This is actually Macron’s multi tier Europe plan
Thanks for putting out such great content! I love these videos. It really feels like I'm getting a look at the big picture. They are so well researched. I really enjoy how deep you go into the history, demographics, economics and all kinds of different contexts. Very well done!
The ending of the remaining veto areas would be foolish. Note how strategically misguided, for different reasons, France and Germany were in their Russia policy. Note also how badly France's attempts to maintain its colonial oversight of West Africa are currently backfiring. This video shows throughout how self-interest motivates these two powers. Recent experiences shows how misguided their policy can be as a consequence. The smaller countries will always need a dependable braking mechanism.
new york doesnt have a veto over the US and the US is doing just fine.
If you want to keep the veto, how do you address rogue players clearly harming the benefit and best interest of the EU, such as Hungary and Poland?
@@catalindeluxus8545 As Britain is no longer involved, fortunately that conundrum is not one I have to worry about. But in view of the catastrophic leadership provided by France and Germany separately in recent years over fundamental issues threatening the security of the bloc, I would be every bit as concerned about the poor leadership that they would offer you as about how frustrating Hungary can be over the next few years.
@@catalindeluxus8545people like you are exactly why the EU should never become federal.
Almost all nations only joined for economical benefit. But now if they differ in opinion and act accordingly with their Brussel masters, they're treated as and deemed traitors and bad actors.
Its empire building and colonisation with a different name.
Offer economic and industrial benefits in exchange for total subservience.
True, but a truly *federalized (super)state* would have it's own, independent, unified unilateral perspective on foreign policy arising from it's direct responsibility for the entirety of the federation. A truly federalized governing body would have sufficiently broad representation from all constituent states and enough of their representative ruling coalitions, alongside legislative superiority in the areas of foreign policy and defense, and as such the federal state would not be making decisions "as France" or "as Germany," although it is true that in reality it would something more like a "as French-German coalition with minority partners chosen from random smaller European states currently ruled by parties with sufficient ideological similarity to the elected federal government."
I'm pretty sure if Texas, California, and New York states were all separate governments making their own foreign policy and defense decisions, they'd be making some *pretty fucking stupid decisions,* especially compared to the USA (which also, we mustn't forget, proves that any federal country can make catastrophically inept and utterly moronic decisions pretty much back to back to back for literal centuries and get away with it pretty much without negative consequence as long as they have a *big fucking armed force* with hegemonic power over it's competitors and allies both). A unified federal European state would have a, let's be blunt, non-trivial hegemonic economic and military potential, especially compared to France or Germany as single states.
Also worth remembering that functionally nobody with any semblance of respect or influence correctly and accurately predicted the Russian invasion of Ukraine, so claiming they were "strategically misguided" in their Russia policy is pretty silly, bluntly. The Russian possibility of invasion of Ukraine was considered to be *catastrophically stupid* to the point of being infeasible, and that was before the invasion when we still Russia's armed forces were moderately competent. Not only have they proven themselves to be grossly underpowered compared to previous estimations, but Putin has also personally demonstrated that *he's a fucking idiot, and arrogant to the point of self-destruction.* Of course, you aren't wrong that France's struggle to maintain it's colonial sphere of influence is both misguided and morally bankrupt to the point of total unjustifiability, and the root of the problem(s) are the self-interested myopia of both powers. The solution, however, isn't political balkanization and checks designed specifically to be used by reactionaries and conservatives in the pursuit of maintaining reactionary and conservative state-policy at the expense of a federal, continental policy platform promulgated in accordance with a continent-wide electoral mandate under federalized, proportional principles.
I don't think most Europeans want a federated pan-European state. Why doesn't anybody ask them?
I do agree that Europeans should be consulted, but a no from some nations should not put a stop to a closer union for the rest: it should led to the creation of multiple tiers where those nations remain behind.
More like a Confederacy, like Germany is a federation, acts like a single nation, but a lot of power is still reserved at each state / canton level
They might be waiting to ask when native Europeans are the minoroty and have been largely replaced by migrants.
@@alexbolide4009 O don't think the US has a lot to gain from a sovereign Europe. The US was quite supportive of Brexit of I recall correctly.
@@nicoruppert4207the US was not. Obama explicitly campaigned for remain, and it Has been US policy that European integration is good as it frees up US resources. The US is not scared of a United Europe
Incredible work, thank you for this big vid GTBT, for me personally it's quite interesting and intriguing topic
As someone in Ireland who loves the EU I can't help but also be suspicious of federalisation. Our voting power got weakened a lot in the Lisbon treaty, and I don't really trust the Germans and French to not keep centralising power once we have lost our veto to the point where what we lose control of our own country. Also I think Ireland's democratic system is structured better than a country like France's. I would want the EU Parliament to be a much bigger part of this and for France and Germany's egos to get out of the way. Also there are a lot of far right parties in the EU that are a hair away from taking power, and I'm apprehensive about whatever that is going to mean for these countries and would therefore mean for Ireland in a tighter union.
I appreciate a lot of the EU's policies and honestly there are many times I've preferred them over our own governmental decisions. But I get the sense that what I would need to be reassured to agree to join a federation is currently beyond what France and Germany would be willing to concede.
How do you know what France and Germany are not willing to concede?
@@fernet8394 Maybe they'll surprise me. Legitimately if the offer is good enough and I have to vote in a referendum I'll go for it. I just want very steadfast assurances that over time the federalised EU won't be restructured so that smaller countries have less and less say and relevance.
@@fernet8394 Sure, what about France almost declaring war on UK for fishing rights then not long after acting like Ukrainian grain don't affect Polish farmers at all?? After a massive crisis they finally took measures and tried to make both sides happy instead of blindly supporting Ukraine. But when their own people loose money they get mad instantly. If you want to become a subject of Franco-Germans be my guess but don't expect others to act so foolishly..
@@ggoddkkiller1342
I did not utter any expectations
This is the best video I have seen in a long time, thank you
Both France and Germany wanted a federal Europe, Maggie Thatcher said the U.K. did want to be part of the federation. The U.K. joined the Common Market, a trade area not a federation.
As of now the only country that has experience as a federation is germany with its 16 states and even integrating east germany hasnt been that successful and left people unsatisfied.
Most other countries have never been federalized and especially france seems extremely centered around paris, with comparably little protection of local cultures (for example france still hasnt signed the european charter for minority languages, even though france has such a diverse linguistic landscape).
The idea is great in concept but i dont know wether france would really be able to work well in federation. There are also issues with wealth redistribution, in germany there are already richer states complaining about funding of weaker states. Imagine what this would be on a larger scale.
@theChaosKe
🇨🇭🇨🇦🇦🇺🇺🇸🇮🇳 : We assume you mean in the EU, and not just in Europe (switzerland), or the rest of the world (US, australia, canada, India, etc).
Yes of course, just the EU (as the video is about the EU) @@Kaede-Sasaki
Austria is a federation as Germany is, maybe not as federalised as Germany in some areas but still
Didn’t even realise that I was watching 51mins, very well made!
Only drawback for an European superstate is that a growing part of the population says 'no f-ing way'. And rightfully so, the EEG was sufficiënt enough.
At 1.35 or so, the resolution of November 2023 to remove the national veto is much less likely to have passed if the UK and Gibraltar had still been in the European Union, at least unamended. Hence the happiness of most of the European political elite for the UK and Gibraltar to leave the European Union.
What is required is to bring some form of well-structured referendum system into being, drawing on a full range of examples: Switzerland, Ireland and others.
What is also required is that all this is brought back into line with the prediction of Oswald Spengler in 1918 in his "The Fall of the West", as quoted by Archimandrite Justin Popovich in his "the Orthodox Church and Ecumenism" of the return and restoration of the West to its previous, pre-1054 Great East-West Schism status of (True) (Orthodox) (Catholic) Christian Civilization.
This means having an Emperor and a basic law and Constitution (which should be that of the restored Third Rome, Russia (shorn of its Asian territories, possibly) with the end of the Roman Papacy and one (True) (Orthodox) (and Holy Catholic and Apostolic) Patriarch for all of Europe, in accordance with the Orthodox prophecies, which, by definition never err, that the laws of the Roman Emperors Theodosius the Great and Justinian must be applied properly: no law is valid unless it complies with God's law, i.e. Canon law.
The first principle of this law is that necessity knows no law. Hence King David distributed the show bread, 🍞🥖, only meant to be eaten by the priests, to his starving soldiers.
This has to act as a filter.
The EU and its predecessor communities as well as EFTA and the EEA, are, in fact, confederations, not federations, in terms of classical political science definitions, because their members have always had the right to secede.
As was the Soviet Union, is Liechtenstein (with the 11 villages within it having that right), and has been Canada since 2000 with a ("Federal") Dominion of Canada Act defining how secession can occur.
For the European Union to become a Federal State, as classically defined and without which the term is meaningless, it would have to abolish the right for its member states to secede.
What is being proposed, at least for now, and in line with Article 50 of the 2009 Treaty of Lisbon, requiring member states to give two years notice of leaving and to leave in accordance with their own constitutional requirements, is actual a European Confederal state.
I travel a lot globally. It part of my profession for many years. It have changed me and made new feel that Europe is my home. Not just the country in Europe I live it, but all of Eurpoe.
Europe is quite diverse, but does have some critical common and important similarities.
So I will welcome a united Europe. Sadly it will likely not happen in my lifetime though.
There’s nothing I’d want more then a federalized Europe. Despite the fact that I’m deeply distrustful of the institution in Brussels.
It bothers me that there’s (in the mainstream) little room for positions that aren’t anti federalization or pro EU. I.e there’s no room for the Pro federalization, anti EU of us.
If I had to vote between them I’d still vote for a federal state under the EU, as once it’s done the institution can be changed from the inside.
I suspect that only a typical "EU" exercise in double standards, hypocrisy and the coercion of smaller member states will get you anywhere near the "EUSSR" which is what a federal superstate would be in practice, but mercifully we British have already escaped so it's not our problem. Though the obvious defence implications of such a state are its inevitably supplanting NATO's European pillar and so should also result in our full and immediate withdrawal from that too. Hopefully along with the other non-EU allied powers, especially the other two Anglosphere ones.
It took me 20 minutes into the videi to realise we've been blessed with an HOUR long video essay. And with so many exciting citation I didnt know about yet. That monograph of Post War Western Europe looks delightful especially.
I thought it curious that the 22 november vote in the European Parliament hasn't been covered or touched upon yet on the geopolitics side of youtube. If you don't later in the video, it's worth mentioning, I think, that much of the proposal stems from the European Citizens' Initiative, a mechanism aimed at increasing direct democracy by enabling "EU citizens to participate directly in the development of EU policies"
The whole idea of a federal Europe has always been interesting to me, gonna have fun watching this.
its a logical idea for survival; but 🇺🇸 America failed at it and had to reroute a new ID of what success looks like.
Bringing people of different cultures side by side you need a brutal rule let's not pretend.
there is a lot of corruption in the smaller countries of the EU,most of the money not being used the right way.this brings delays in development
@@cinnamonstar808 how did America fail at it? They’ve always been one.
@@mikemonard5418 There's lot of corruption in the EU in general. Not only on national level but in the EU parliament as well. It's called lobbying.
EU will struggle deciding whether to fund a military or social programs.
@@Mmjk_12 Soldiers are irrelevant.
Brilliant & Objective Analysis 👌🏼
Shortly, we're facing new german anschluss of the entire Europe done by economic means.
Yes I agree, if you were in the UK, would you support the "handing over" of the control of the UK's National Interest to a Federal EU ?
The future or utopia? Well, we know it won't be the latter. If we're lucky it won't be the former either.
I'm European and I dont want it. In fact I think the EU should be only an open market. Centralization is bad.
Putin would love an EU that is only for trade and not politically united
@@isaks7042 Why should we care what Putin wants and does not want? He is not the center of the world.
@@teyrncousland7152 Simple reason: Putin is the main enemy. Putin wants a politically divided Europe and North America so he can achieve his goals easier.
@@isaks7042let's wait until Russia finally defeats Ukraine to be scared of them again.
@@teyrncousland7152 because he's gonna subjugate us
When you look at the top 20 universities in the world, only 6 are in Europe. And all of them are in England. Which is not even in the EU. You can see why the EU is really desperate to look relevant.
It's more about France and Germany being desperate. Most countries of the EU mind their business.
Well, real jobs and universities are more and more disconnected.
"European companies" EU regulated everything, practically is impossible for a EU company to do anything really innovative ... EU startups move to UK or US to get anywhere. The EU federation will end like the Ottoman empire, which was becoming more centralized as it closed to the end.
I have a huge problem with globalists,yeah. The bigger you get the more fractured you are.
EU companies can’t start. They don’t give an initial funding too. What the hell,the EU companies are riddled with cronyists and mega rich.
Your point has nothing to do with the EU itself, you just want weaker regulations.
@@MajinOthinus weaker regulations ? They are weak as they are, WV and the big guys do whatever they want.
I want sane regulations.
@@xyeB Andrew Tate profile pic lmao
I am sitting here in Brexit Britain under a right-wing Conservative government.
To me, belonging to a European federation sounds like heaven.
Then why wouldn't you just move?
right wing conservative goverment that cant take care of migrant issues hahaha good joke if thats right wing i am far-far-far-far-right i guess
@@najak4773 Well. Anything that is to the right from the rulling party is "far right". I even saw evident centrists being called "far right".
So "far right" actualy means "not leftist enough".
yeah the whole right and left thing is stupid because politics and our planet is much more complicated to simply use 2 words to describe political views @@wzburzonykisiel
@@najak4773 actually two words may be enough for some general description of certain views. "laissez faire", "nordic model" or "national socialism" speak for themselves.
Beautifully done.
Dystopia or inevitable failure more like.
I Live in Latvia an i would like for this to happen. It would be great for financial growth.
The EU State is one of the primary reasons for Brexit happening in UK.
Obviously, they're not european they hate europe they repeatedly invaded Europe everytime it got a unified force.
@@GuscioRossorich from the Asian child with an Asian profile picture, the UK is certainly European. Napoleon and Hitler both wanted to destroy us so what should you have us do? Sit back? Of course we went to war, and won every time. Also worth a note we don't get repeatedly invaded, they fail at the crossing the channel part each time as they will again
No, it was British popular misunderstanding of the very concept. Oh, and raging xenophobia of course.
well if i was a native brit and i saw how my people are being replaced by every other nation in this planet i think i would be more than xenophobic @@PLF...
@@najak4773 which is probably why nobody likes you
9:33 "The UK held Napoleon back“
At least we now know that GTBT is not a history channel…
We also know where it's biases lie
So Waterloo and Trafalgar didn’t happen?
@@jimbodimbo981
In Waterloo did more Germans fight than Brits. The Prussian army of general Blücher had more soldiers than Wellingtons army. The Brits would’ve lost that battle without Prussia and the Prussian army.
Probably an oversimplification, but the UK was the only major country always against Napoleon, Russia and the German states supported Napoleon in stages, so if the UK didn’t push them against Napoleon then he would’ve won. The UK did also fund large parts of the coalition but yes didn’t fight too much on land themselves, so the UK led the way everywhere else except blood.
Nothing said here by GTBT was incorrect. The UK fought Napoleon more than the Prussians, Austrians and Russians. Britain wiped out the combined French and Spanish navies with no other support, liberated the Iberian peninsula - again with no support, and obviously beat Napoleon at Waterloo, the most important battle, which the Prussians would have stood no chance. Your jet-black hatred of Britain is clouding you to the historic facts.
Last time a Frenchman/Italian and a German Austrian tried to unify Europe didn't go well. This proposition was also proposed nearly a century ago with a Map outlining Europe with the worst kind of drawn borders. Not to mention trying to unify a continent with so much variety in each corner of it is nearly impossible. There needs to be a single language and forcing another other groups to just abandon their heritage won't go well. This is a nonsensical idea. Lets not forget the development level range in certain areas is higher than in others which will just create more disparities.
Yes!
why would u need a single language if the current state of languages works well, also there r cases where language has gradual dialect borders between countries too
Answer: both!! volt💜
Can you elaborate?
As a European I’ll tell you this. Europe is not like the states. While the states is much bigger in size & the climate in California is vastly different from New York, the same language & culture is shared between them. That is not the case in Europe. A federal Europe state would be impossible not to create but to last more than a decade or two without collapsing or falling into civil war. This is because there is no ethnic majority that holds over 50% of the continent’s population that would be necessary in order to provide unity. Instead there are multiple like French, German, Spanish, English, Italian & Polish. Put it simply a federal Europe would only be one recession away from collapse.
@satishgupta2658 My guy you clearly haven’t visited all of Europe. Good luck using English in your day to day life in France or any Baltic or Eastern European country. In the Nordic countries like Denmark & Norway yes most people do speak English but that’s not every country.
@satishgupta2658 good luck teaching a 50 year old a new language plus I don't think you'll have that much support. Many members might view that as an attempt at stripping their nationality. Look I can tell by your comments that you're from an English speaking country and haven't interacted with many people from different cultures in Europe or at least not in great detail. If you make English an official language many would view that as an attempt of removing their own language (Hungary, Greece, etc).
Plus if you want to know what happens with a country with no true majority to unify them look at Yugoslavia.
@satishgupta2658culture isn't just language. Learning English didn't magically make live the way British do.
Also the UK and the US share the same language but their cultures are vastly different.
@satishgupta2658 you’d have better luck trying to convince Americans to give up the second amendment than creating a whole new language and teaching it. Speaking of which America itself has become very divided politically recently almost becoming two countries in one. 2024 elections there are going to be big and will likely affect us Europeans big time whether it’s Trump or Biden we’ll certainly feel the results. I personally don’t see any candidate accepting the results so it’d be interesting to see what happens.
Germany and France should make desisions with IT, ESP and PL together cause these are biggest and most influential coutries. Also voice of smaller countries should be considered
If smaler countries’s voice is to be “ket listened “ only, the small countries leave ee, immediately. They have no other interest of remaining, than their safety. Not to leave their safety in the hands of Germany.
@@NoumenonAndPhenomenon Iceland and Norway are not interested in joing the EU Iceland because its too far away and its current economic model works it only seriously considered EU membership during the Icelandic financial crisis when Icelandic banks failed but after it switched to a tourist based economy Iceland grew faster than the Eurozone did. Norway doesn't want EU membership because it would have to give up its oil and gas profits and redistribute them to the member sates which it doesn't want to do.
@@NoumenonAndPhenomenonBro These „State Blocks“ exist already
The Netherlands is more important than Poland, sorry.
@@nettcologne9186 Not really, it's too small and unlike Poland has no influence on its neighbors.
as a Pole i think that Germany before the WW1 was very powerful and they were jealous that they had just a little bit compared to the UK's overseas states .Instead of colonising remote territory Germany focused too much on Germanization of Poles which brought to an adverse reaction and hatred over the next century .When Germany failed with napoleon wars in 1812 Polish felt relatively well in Germany there were a lot of rights ,polish members in German parliamentary assembly .After a while Germany were very confident when they won the war with France 1870 ,lead to nationalism and the relations between Poles and Germany were the worst in whole history between two countries.
German ans polish relations are very low at the moment, which is really bad. The axis spain, france, germany, poland, ukraine and italy are the backbone of europe. It wont work without each other
@@seb_5969Ukraine?
@@seb_5969 I wish we had better relations, believe me. But at this moment, I can't imagine being unified with Germany. I want Poland to stay Poland. EU is cool, and I love it. Poland benefits a lot from it (albeit less than Germany but still). But I just don't want my country to be downgraded to a "rural part of the European Federation". This whole federalisation idea in general seems to prioretise Western Europe's interests, instead of equalising the the continent, which is very much in Poland's bussiness.
@@mastercalabaster9824 we dont have to become one state or lose our identity but certain interests can only be pursued together, like Immigration and military. A european military is imo necessary, especially since the US is becoming less and less dependable.
One thing's for sure, if this FES would be created tomorrow, Putin would have a stroke.
Everyone to the east from Germany - including EU member states - would have a stroke, as this idea is rather unpopular there.
@@wzburzonykisiel I am from the East of Germany, so obviously not everyone.
@@sogerc1 I mean countries, not individuals.
@@wzburzonykisiel Oh, okay then.
Although if a referendum were held I think it would be a good pitch in my country to get rid of the stale politics. But the real question is, who would pitch it?
😂😂😂😂
EU we are stronger together let's build our future together in the face of global challenges! Together we are a superpower state that can secure a place for it self! Much more than any individual country can do alone!
The threat of supranational entities eroding national sovereignty and accumulating centralized power IS a global challenge. Goddamn bootlickers..
My country would never join & would likely leave the EU if that was the direction things were going.
I know 5 other countries that would follow for the same reason
Where are you? Which countries?
This is the most informative and best researched video on this topic. Bravo
i disliked the video though. so not to feed TH-cam algorithm with this federalist nonsense. there is no federation in the world where each of 27 states speak in different language. and for me as a citizen of a small EU nation, i do not want to be ruled by German and French.
@@arisplugis5197Well, India is a federation and it has 121 languages, tho only 22 are official
@@nosmokejazwinski6297 OK. you forced me to put it in different way now.
there is no federation in the world where each of 27 states are different ethnicity, history, tradition, religion and way of life. many things are common, but there are wast differences as well. in everything.
@@arisplugis5197 that still applies to India, tho. There are 4 major racial groups in India and at least 2 thousand ethnicities. India is much more religiously diverse than Europe. Cultures, traditions and history vary significantly from one place to another. That being said, I’m not mentioning this as a “pro EU argument” and claiming that India is a good example to follow, just saying that such federation indeed exists. I think instead of denying its existence, a better argument would be to say that India is the example why such federations are not a good thing which is debatable but at least it’s a rational argument.
Federal EU is impossibie, but few states can federal itself, but that also highly surreal. (Germanofrankia and other monsters)..
The United States will not allow this. they want europe to be divided into individual countries because then every european country including germany and france must be a colony of the usa
Not necessarily, the US is getting fatigued, while they’ll dislike losing their influence especially militarily, the US is starting to reconsider whether it should be involved in international affairs at all. Having a strong Europe that can handle Russia alone, than the current situation where the US is bending for Ukraine, would probably be supported by most Americans.
@@RedwitheranI think that the influence of the United States is the main thing that prevents peace between Eastern and Western Europe...And I prefer the concept of a single European space from Lisbon to Vladivostok than the colonial status of a fragmented Europe
@@Lgstaev Most of Eastern Europe are weary of Russia and want to get away from it, until it can be trusted and open, which it is no where near right now. Western Europe and America clearly didn’t like Eastern Europe when they were communist but fully opened to them when they became democratic. The US and Europe tried with Russia, but under Putin, Russia sees the EU and US as enemies. (Yes one EU state or two might like Russia, but overall closer to the US). Russia is the main obstacle for a united Europe, the US just wants a democratic United Europe than a Russia-led autocratic one.
@@LgstaevThat's very idiotic. Russia wouldn't be democratic even if the US didn't exist. Putin labels everything European as Satanistic. Even if Russia were in the same page as Europe, they are still too big. Lovely thought of a single union including the lands that Russia currently occupies, but with or without the Americans, it wouldn't happen.
@@Lgstaevas long as its not under Putin
They are talking about splitting Belgium which is already a tiny state.
Europe would end up balkonized in like 5 years.
In a way no, breaking up the existing European multi ethnic nation states in smaller and smaller, weaker easily controlled countries suits the Eureaucrats divide and conquer goals. Cultural nationalism leads to more internation economical dependence. A United Belgium with its own stands in the way of a stronger Brussels.
this is a really nice video! Thanks for the effort!
Want software: USA
Want hardware: China
Want regulation: EU
A Federal Europe would have only worked in the early 90s when the EU was still only Western Europe. The eastern Bloc has too much cross cultural differences and honestly find the concept suspiciously similar to communism.
Then Eastern Europe should be kicked out. Poland and Hungary have already caused enough problems.
@@jasonhaven7170well. They won't. They keep each other safe and the EU can't do much about it without betraying its own values.
lol if you totally leave eastern europe to its own its gonna become part of russia and then you gonna have to deal with bigger russia not eastern europe :D welcome to real world where there are no easy and perfect decisions @@jasonhaven7170
@@wzburzonykisieleu can do alot. Specially now because noone want to ruin themself as bad as the british.
Would only be a good idea for the EU 4, not the outlying late additions - taxpayers can't be expected to bankroll less well off citizens on the other side of the continent
In any country there are less prosperous areas as well. But you're probably not a fan of ditching such areas, right?
Don't forget that most of the post 2004 members were piss poor former communist countries, some had never been independent countries before. The investment and integration of those countries with the rest of the continent made them develop and prosper massively. Concerning living standards they're not on the level of like Germany, but give it another decade and some will get close to it. And the better off these countries are the more Western Europe will profit from it as well. If you want to look at it from a selfish point of view: it's an investment that in time will really pay off.
@@zaros1781 there’s a difference between regions in your own country vs a random other EU nation, people do not share a sense of belonging in the same way no matter how much some vain politicians try to make it so simply in a desire to be equal with the US/China
Federal Europeee LET GOOOOO
Let's do a quick history lesson.
In the past people identified themselves with their villages or portions of large cities they lived in (middle ages)
Later people Identified themselves with the region they lived in (surrounding cities and in general the province or region)
When nationalism came people identified themselves with the country itself.
you could argue that Europeans are too different from each other but if you asked the Germans in 1700 if they were every going to fully unify you would be laughed at (even thought the term "german" already existed for some time).
The idea of a European people already exist, people see themselves as European.
you could argue the distance but nowadays you can travel from one end of Europe to the other end in far less time then people had to travel back in the day within their own country.
for these reasons I believe we'll unify, it all depends on the events in the coming years and decades how quickly this will happen.
for example a war against a common enemy is a great unifying factor.
Nationalism was probably the worst that could happen in Europe...
Lisbon here. Agreed in all aspects!
Rome here, fully agree!
no one see themselves as European except far right White supremacist and Far Left Euro-Idealist, it's like less than 6% of the "European population"
France will not die for the IV Reich
A video like this one was the most recent video uploaded when I started watching this channel. Talking about a "United States of Europe". I remember hating it. Not the video itself. Just the concept. As an American I am biased against the EU in general. I wish the whole organization would fall apart. I have no doubt that, if it did unify into a federal state, a civil war would be guaranteed one day. The peoples of Europe are far too culturally segregated in their own present nations for this to work smoothly.
Why don't you americans stick your noses in your own business?
Why dafaq do you hate the EU that doesn't have any impact on your life?
All members are in the Union willingly and some made a huge effort to be a member because it's beneficial to all and nobody wants to leave, quite the opposite there's nations waiting for over 10 years to be approved as member.
Stay in your lane. This doesn't concern you.
Europeans: "This is a complicated issue and we have to figure out how to make this work, for centuries a unified Europe has been an unattainable drea -"
*American walks into the room
Europeans: "Ha, this is Utopia! life is perfect, look at how fast our trains are! and hey, someone break my arm so I can get it fixed instantly and for free!"
*American leaves
Europeans: "Okay, seriously, how do we finally make this work?"
This is basically how I envision this issue being discussed.
So, if you were in the UK, would you support the "handing over" of the control of the UK's National Interest to a Federal EU ?
For me in Finland the Federal European State sounds about as appealing as joining Russia. This is extremely severe threat for the nation.
People like you also said joining NATO would be a bad idea until reality hit.
@@cyberfunk3793 I have been in favor of NATO for +15 years. Working together is very different than being ruled over by people. NATO is for blocking people from doing that to them through military means.
А что с нами не плохо так-то.
@@foss9455 Ei kyllä oo mittää hajua mitä lie tuo vois tarkottaa. Parempi niin kanssa, moni sukulaiseni uhrasi paljon tai jopa kaikkensa ettei tommosta tänne pakotettu. Ranskaa, Saksaa tai muuta ei myöskään tarvita. Elä ja anna elää.
lol, a federal EU is easily better than joining Russia.
United we can counteract Russia
If the EU countries ever want to truly become a superpower to rival the likes of America and China, which it seems that they do, then yes they'll have to become a singular country. I think it's a matter of when and not if, but what is truly uncertain is how soon considering the rise of the far-right that Europe is currently going through and how long that'll last.
China is crashing and burning.
its hard but...thats the only way for EU to stay competitive
Never happen !! Confederation is only way not federation !!
How is China a rival? 😂
@TheFriendlyFascistwrong. We don’t want fascists and neo-nazis here. All political parties and nationalists are terrorists.
One of the best documentaries on the origin of European Union.
Only I'm having a hard time with understanding the accent. Constantly rewinding and listening again.
Great video, as usual
in June 2024, elections to the European parliament will most likely shift the majority to right-wing parties and a tendency to more nationalistic governments can be expected too. any enlargement of the EU will require it to first change its decision making process. it also adds more diversity and strain to the system. the idea of a European 'Federal State' gets ever more elusive the more members join the union.
therefore, the French president already vented the idea of a *multi-speed Europe.* those who favour their national state could remain on the outer skirts of the union while those who wish for an 'ever closer union' are allowed to proceed too. however, the treaties don't allow for this yet and need to get amended or changed. nobody knows how this will end and when? good luck! the world is watching.
The problem with such a system has proven itself by brexit already. EU has no problems punishing and making it as difficult and painful as possible to leave the union. The thing with power consolidation is that it becomes a black hole. It becomes voracious and wants more. It will look good on paper.. but that black hole will slowly start to tear and bring everything in its orbit closer. Those in the center would make up policies that only favours those in the center, at the expense for those at the rim, effectively it becomes a carrot and whip scenario. Do as we say and join the fold, or you will find yourself recieving the whip more. And if you dare to leave, well.. just look at what we did with GB.. imagine what we will do to you.
Good. Eastern European countries like Poland and Hungary need to learn.@@nelyrions1838
One extremely big factor for the question whether Europe will become a Republic or not is the result of the first europe-wide party 'Volt' in the upcoming European elections!
They seem to be full-on woke, so they alineate the majority of the population from the start. They won a few seats in the Dutch parliament and have been internally fighting ever since. (Woke people are not nice to each other.)
@@ronald3836that’s okey, we don’t function on majority rule, but proportional representation
@@ronald3836 Being 'woke' doesn't exist. Volt is a functioning party.
@@banicite it does exist, and it turns people into nasty beings.
What is "woke"? @@ronald3836
If this happened it will be the beginning of the end for EU.
Exactly
First, it would be good if Europe could go 20 years without killing each other for old grudges and national ethicnicites.
Very good video and summary!
A distopia imo
Well done. As usual.
Your ending was rational and open-ended for a reason.
The almighty “unknown”….
As an American, there can be no stability in Europa(or the world) until the R.F. is defeated. Ukraine must “win” for Europe to coalesce into stability, prosperity and peace.
Slava Ukraine!
From Boston and Seattle, USA
I fully agree from Poland
Yes, if russia "win" ( no body win, it is not a football match ppl die ), there can be stability just do like every country on earth and negotiate. Either way, since ukraine (as of right now ) is clearly on the backfoot, we will be forced to deal with Russia
In framing a government, which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty is this: You must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place, oblige it to control itself.
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted.
- President James Madison
Slava USA 🇺🇸 Slava EU 🇪🇺
@@MysteryKmt yeah so you break up the federal gov and institute a system of checks and balances. The US has done a good job to ensure this, and while it may mean legislation passes at very slow rates, the risk of overbearing government is reduced significantly. Not perfect, but it's worked for 250 years.
It depends how much of a shit show in terms of the EU next leaders will be. Especially of France and Germany.
Yup.
Two minor corrections to your excellent narrative: yes France was always ensuring to have a decent place in the European construction BUT the REAL issue at the time - also shared by Italy and Benelux countries - was to prevent a too powerful Germany to rise again and stage war.
Another correction: the UK was invited to participate to this early stages of the European construction but declined it because the UK was more interested by an economic alliance and hated the idea of a sort of political union and defense union which was around in the 50s.
A distopia.
Hungary definately will be never part of any kind of USSR like imperial adventure - it was enough only once. And of course it is doomed from the first moment. EU is only an economic coorporation, but so different culturally - never a french or german or polish will gave up it's own culture for some non-existing european pseudo- "cullture" . And creating another Rome is not a wise idea, because Imperiums are restricted in time by nature. But nation states can survive always.
Structure doesn't resembe USSR much at all, nor like rome. Nationalism is a plauge though. Independant states , integrated states are both fine though. Nation states have only existed for the last few centuries and are likely a short lived wreched historical anomoly.
@@Sara3346 You cannot be independent under a federal umbrella. The examples are wrong, because both Switzerland or Germany have a common swiss or german cultural and national identity. EU dont have. EU even nowadays trying to resemble a centralized authoritarian structure, which totally careless about the souvereign interests of the nations, especially on the perifery. Meanwhile still the present EU have balances (unanomity law for example), to trying to compensate smaller states. Present EU I wouldn't call USSR, but this imagined futuristic federal imperial EU very easily. Even a cohesive ideology would not be missing, and this would also be closely related to Marxism, just as neoliberalism (nothing to do with the real Millian liberalism) is related to communism...
And come on: the European seed is the Westfalian idea of nation states! Calling that "historical anomaly" is something what I read on my childhood schoolbooks, when marxists explained the history on the communist Hungary..😀
Fortunately the EU will kick Hungary out eventually.
@@jasonhaven7170 Just in your pink dreams, dear bolshevik. Hungary will saving the EU from this wrong steps towards federalism. And if Hungary not be able to save them, doesn't matter, because the EU in this form stop to exist. For federalism they need to create a totally new agreement with each members, and all the members will be free will to decide, they want to jump into the dark or not. In this case 1000%, not Hungary will be the only one, who will reject.
But as I see the movements, EU citizens very divided in this question. Even the liberal conservative parties (European Peoples Party) don't want to hear about federalist Europe! But you guys on the left, need to learn some basic democracy and tolerancy - to not want to kick out immediately everybody, who have different opinion than yours. And learn some basic, how the EU working, and no such mechanism to kick out anybody.
As an individual don't do it! the farther away your leading government is the less it cares about you. It's going to be more of "the greater good". Many Americans actively want to revert from a federalized system to more localized governments that they can feel their voice is actually heard and matters.
No worries, in EU the individual voice is more important than in the states. We don’t have to listen the lesser of two evils. As you can see the parliament is extremely diverse in political ideas and representation
@@inteallsviktigt lol ok
@@kodakomp Wel yes every member can be represented equally without having a VETO. And currently there’s only about 10 points a VETO can be used by any country.
1: taxation;
2: the finances of the Union (own resources, the multiannual financial framework);
3: harmonisation in the field of social security and social protection;
4: certain provisions in the field of justice and home affairs (the European prosecutor, family law, operational police cooperation, etc.);
5: the common foreign and security policy, with the exception of certain clearly defined cases;
6: the common defence policy,;
7: citizenship (the granting of new rights to European citizens, anti-discrimination measures)
The resolution proposes to extend the number of areas for which joint member state decisions are taken by a qualified majority vote instead of unanimously.
We have the council (one member of each country) and vote by double majority A qualified majority is reached if two conditions are simultaneously met:
55% of member states vote in favour - in practice this means 15 out of 27
the proposal is supported by member states representing at least 65% of the total EU population
or Reinforced qualified majority. To reach a reinforced qualified majority if two conditions are simultaneously met:
at least 72% of member states vote in favour - in practice this means at least 20 out of 27
member states supporting the proposal represent at least 65% of the EU population.
The president of the council is rotated every 6 months.
Parliament is proportionally represented and no single state can have a majority, the biggest voting share.
Germany with the most MEPs barely have 13% of the seats. France have 11~% and Netherlands have 4~% and Denmark have 2~%
The coalition lead by Netherlands however is made up of 18.5% of the seats. A coalition lead by Germany have 21% of the seata and a coalition lead by Denmark have 13% of the seats
All the while a French MEP is the president of the parliament.
You dont know anything about the eu at all then but you probably think you do ajd are biased thanks to your profile picture 😊@@inteallsviktigt
@@alkatrosberner624 I do know how the EU works. I just value and appreciate the EU project. And I want it to federalize for my and our benefit.
And you imply something I stated was wrong, can you mention what that is?
European Union needs a unique army. Cheers from Porthugal.
Cooperation where it is needed yes, but the countries are to diverse to make a Union. It's only trouble.
It's been a rough year with losses from failed banks and government, real estate crashes, a struggling economy, and downturns in stocks and dividends. It feels like everything has been going wrong.
What a terrible year it is…
It is always good to have a financial plan. I work with a professional planner and fixed-income strategist in NY. The fixed income portion of your portfolio won't simply serve as a buffer to the volatility of the equity portion of your portfolio, but will provide legitimate income.
Wow both a CaspianReport and GTBT video in one day! Lucky us
I'm not sure I fully agree with this analysis. It seems a little to focused on great man theory of development. And while certain characters of course have more influence in things, it is important to remember that other nations could still be pretty significant and for a long time had a veto on many a decision. Not to mention at times proposals actually came from the smaller countries because they deemed in to be a favorable development for themselves, the larger whole or both.
For instance this analysis proposes nothing much happened between the vote system change and now. But this isn't actually the case. If one looks internally then one would find that over this period the EU slowly started to acquire increasing defense spending powers. First in just cooperative arrangements, then in funding dual technology development and with Ukraine even some direct military funding support for Ukraine.
Another element of interest here is how France and Germany continued some further integration of military industry between each other. For instance exemplified in the merger of the German and French tank manufacturers in to one. Other countries also have had some level of consolidation happen, so it isn't even just a matter of these countries alone.
As such I'm some what dubious of the exact claimed reason and motivations for the EU development as it is. It seems far more likely to think that many parties have been busy unifying bits and pieces of Europe over time, simply because they were running less effectively and efficiently at a national level. Like for instance the expenses of developing next generation weapons. This seems to fit much better then a flawed great man argument in the matter. A position that is also somewhat disrespectful to other states influence in the union, as can also clearly be seen in their at times quite sizeable representation numbers. And truthfully the argument presented only seems even more unlikely when one considers the expansion of the EU only further waters down France and Germany total share of the EU.
It's nice that you mentioned a common German-French tank, I think the Italians also joined. It's good that you mentioned helping Ukraine.
However, Poland had been trying for over 10 years to join the production of the French-German and Italian tank, but each time it was refused. Poland received the answer that they could buy this tank at best and not get involved in production.
Similarly, when it comes to aid for Ukraine, the first military and lethal equipment from Germany arrived in Ukraine only after 11 months of fighting. Not to mention the fact that the German ambassador in the first days of the war said that it was not worth helping Ukraine because it would fall in a few days.
@@bobstone0 I'm well aware of these matters, yes.
Though the previous Polish government didn't gain itself much trust, considering the political shenanigans they tried to play. Why would anyone trust a tank program to some one playing shenanigans with them, there's enough political complexities between countries with out that kind of headache and potential delay.
And aid wise, interestingly enough Germany has turned out to be more reliable then Poland. Where towards the end the previous Polish government suddenly did a 180 and suddenly cut off direct aid. Germany meanwhile has literally doubled down and has further increased direct military aid to twice the previous budget at 8 billion. Though they've also allowed their military industry to start building facilities in Ukraine now as well, something Poland hasn't done either. And they've said that in case it seems like Ukraine gets in to to much trouble they are willing to declare an emergency and take loans to keep Ukraine afloat.
So oddly enough, we're now in a situation where Poland reduced aid, while Germany has turned out to go even more all in then Poland ever did. So seems they take things pretty seriously indeed now.
I guess we'll see how things go from here though. Maybe the new Polish government will increase aid again after all.
@@Quickshot0 Nonsense! this is your knowledge of the world.
The rejection of joint cooperation in the construction of the tank took place in the years 2007-2015, i.e. during the pro-German government that returned to power today, in 2023.
The new Polish government from 2015-2022 did not even raise this issue, which is why it purchased tanks from Korea and the USA. Because the great Germans will not share with anyone.
I have never seen bigger lies and nonsense about German aid. German calculations show promises as already fulfilled orders. In these calculations, Polish tanks of Soviet design are valued at $0.50 each, and German helmets at $300 each.
I will not comment on the words "political intrigues", it is fascist left-wing propaganda, when someone is conservative, he is evil, stupid, hurts children, women, gays and destroys the German-Russian agreement. The devil in human skin.
Why is your knowledge 100% lies, even Russians don't lie like that, because they usually lie 90%. The Polish government did not block aid! Are you crazy? are you writing from the hospital? It was farmers who opposed the transport of agricultural products that did not meet the standards and requirements imposed by the EU.
The Germans also did everything not to give up the tanks, they came up with more and more stupid requirements and gave an ultimatum that they would not send tanks to Ukraine unless the USA did it too. Olaf Scholz must have been very surprised when the Americans said there was no problem and they would send the Abrams to Ukraine.
This is my last message to you. Because I don't have the strength to get angry at bad and stupid people.
Germany delayed helping because it wanted Ukraine to fall. Because the German government did not want to break off business and trade contacts with Russia. And if Ukraine actually fell in 3 days, everyone would just say, "well, Russia is powerful, you have to deal with it", and at the very end the left-fascist media would start criticizing Poland and inventing lies. That Poles are striving for war and doing everything wrong, while Russia would make further demands for NATO to revert to the pre-1999 levels.
@@Quickshot0 Germany should pay Poland reparation to the tune of 1 trillion Euros for World War II damages :) the Communist government treaties dont count because they were Moscows puppets at the time.
@@Quickshot0 and thats why we can be all greater together...
Just a thought, but wouldn't it be easier to make a new federal EU and only invite countries that wish to join that federation and leave the old alliance-monetary union EU? Instead of complicated and numerous treaties, etc, there can be a constitution drafted by founders and amendable by an easier process (no veto, maybe ⅔ vote in ⅔ of member-states, or maybe ⅘ vote of all federal EU citizens)? Those that didn't want the new federal EU could stay in the old one, albeit smaller version after the countries in favour of federation left.
This would be a dystopia* Governments must stay small and independent, while unions provide free trade.
After watching this I am somehow happy that the UK left the Union.
They would've only be another obstacle in reforming the EU
Its a necessity for Europe to be relevant in the future.
necessity for who? EU fanatics in Brussels, or the people of Europe. The desire to be equal with the US/China is simply vanity which most people do not even think or care about.
Im very much against federalisation, im fine with the single market but not at the cost of my country losing its independence.
This.
That means you like it when for example Russia would invade one small country after another?
@@fischersfritz468That's what NATO is for
@@ironczar8975 nato is too reliant on the US. The european countries spend a lot of money on the military, but it is too inefficient with many different headquarters
Why do you care about your country? Your country's independence doesn't change anything for your day to day life (maybe very minimaly). If the EU doesn't federalize we will just get behind china and the US without any chance of competing with them.
When ruling just one country is not enough….
As much as europeans are alike they are different so this is not realistic because everyone would look after their best interest, the strong gets the cake and the less gets the crumbles, we are already seeing this today where france and germany are splitting up europe grabbing their share of what can be grabbed, trying to lead... just leads to much fighting.
God forbid
I dont really want many more new members. I feel with so many voices to agree things grind to a halt or slow down by allot. Maybe 2 or 3 smaller unions could get more done
that's why we need to get rid of the veto!
Isn’t that method called WW1 & WW2 ?
@@geheimnis8187 yes. get rid of veto and always do as France and Germany say. why small EU nations would ever agree to do that?
@@arisplugis5197 imagine your country but for every law to pass, every leader of every region has to agree to it, would that work?
@@arisplugis5197 It could work like in USA where smaller states get disproportionally more voting power based on their population, but not a complete veto on every important matter. Otherwise it leaves EU completely impotent on important matters if some wannabe putins little dictator (totally not hungary) gets to sabotage the whole union
I hate the idea of a federal Eurostate
I love the idea of a federal eurostate
@@sergeantzack1106 why would onel love something that has no function? There is no shared identity to stick out of love and there is no problem that requires an organization like this. A Eurostate will not improve the commerce further and won't alter the fact that its industrial base requires resources from elsewhere. The only capital that we had, high levels of trust, social reliability, good education, will be destroyed as it is already ongoing. Social experimentation will amplify and that's why some people love it. However, this is pathology against which Europe was more resistant when in single nationhoods.
@@alodwich
Jesus bcs the population is ageing and NATO is going to the toilet with the Republicans, and Russia will take it over if we don't get serious.
@@alodwich so you want us all to get swamped by the superpowers?
@@alodwich Pax Americana is pretty much over and the world is becoming a more and more dangerous place we have to stick together and unite to survive the coming decades
Amazing video. In the past, federalization was just a tool for France to keep its supremacy. The fact that France and Germany keep pushing for this project is concerning.
We must have a stronger union of democratic member states. Not a federalized super-state.
I predict the far right is going to win the EU elections coming June. The EU is just too undemocratic and too non-transparent for the larger population to stomach.
Ireland should break away from the EU and have a closer relationship with the UK. We already have a really close relationship.
A Federal Europe should be modeled after the Swiss model of Federated Participatory Democracy. Member nations should be divided into Cantons from pre-existing subnational divisions (like Germany's Bundeslander or France's departaments), with the "Nations" existing between the Cantons and the Federal goverment with only the powers given to them by their constituent Cantons.
That barely works in Switzerland, let alone the potential superstate of an european confederated state.
I was arguing a federal Europe cannot exist as long as the nations exist not that long ago. And now someone proposes stripping nations away more. That was quick. I guess the next step after this will be arguing for only having Cantons, and that is where the communities will be dragged to.
@@bernadmanny Switzerland is among if not the most prosperous non-petrostate. How does it "not work"?
@@jascrandom9855 Switzerland is a tiny mostly homogenous state you might be mislead to thinking it equally speaks French Italian and German when over 70% of Swiss citizens speak German as their first language with everyone else given minority rights. the Swiss cantons decide their own migration policy and who to let into the canton and even labor laws are different between each Canton. For example if you want to be a lawyer in Switzerland you have to get legally certified as a lawyer in each Canton to practice law. its similar to the U.S in that aspect but in Switzerland each canton has differing educational standards and employment requirements. everything but Foreign Policy is dictated by Swiss Cantons. The Federal council Is also very divided politically and only 3 parties are represented at the federal level.
@@bernadmannyabsolutely works in Switzerland,creepy idea doing it on mass,so that’s a NO from me.