Yes, Brexit has turned out as a huge success story! It has proven that no country can make it on its own nowadays. Being in a strong economic (and political) union does not necessarily mean that you have to give up part of your identity. (As the US example proves). But 27 little nationalist countries are irrelevant in the global stage each on their own. A united Europe would be strong and relevant. Unfortunately our narrow mindedness in Europe lets us be irrelevant, when we could and should be a superpower!
It's not so much that no country can make it on their own, just that they are much weaker for trying, and this is for a country like the UK that isn't exactly small, so the impact is much worse on smaller countries. Independence to me has always been an illusion, the world is very different today with how interconnected it is, the UK is finding that out the hard way that as much independence it thought it wanted, it's still very much connected to the EU out of self-interest. Also, as you point out, even if the EU does become a single country, I see no reason why individual EU countries would need to lose their identity, there are countless ways of forming a political and economic union without losing there identity and seriously, you only have to look at how integrated EU countries are that in many areas, they are more integrated than how US states are in the federal unions, whiles being less so in other areas. Also, let's be honest with ourselves, the US, China and Russia keeps playing EU countries off each other to try and weaken and divide us, Putin does it from the Russian side, Trump does it from the US and Xi does it from China, where do you think the far right is getting its resources from or Orbán from Hungary? The only way around that is a strong united EU, but that is seen as a threat to the other major powers.
It won't get federal on my lifetime, if ever. There's still the problem with balance, as the bigger countries try to say how they want, and others should just accept. As a Finn I'm proud of my country and would never want to see it being anything but independent. The current system works. No need to rock the boat.
Agreed. The main problem, in my opinion, is that we don't all speak the same language. The culture springs from that + history and we have far too diverse backgrounds due to that. If we all ended up speaking the same language and enough time passed I' would say a hesitant "maybe". But yeah, not in my lifetime either. Im 36.
Yeah, exactly. As a Pole, I agree. EU is already teetering dangerously close to... well, stuff. As a Pole, I'd rather fight to death than someday be in some united states of Europe. Pft
I disagree, I don't believe the current system is working particularly well, that isn't to say I want a federal Europe, but I don't think not rocking the boat is wise when change is needed.
Depends on how you look at it, but let's get this one out of the way, there's no such thing as true independence, especially for smaller countries as they are at the mercy of the ones that create the global laws, rules and regulations, so there's independence to agree, but they have to toe the line with the big powers, you want an example of that, just look at the UK, for all the huffing and puffing, they still more or less mirror EU laws, rules and regulations in the key areas that matter, and this is also the case for Switzerland, Norway and Iceland, on the surface they are independence, but in reality, they are pretty much under the EU banner. The world is becoming far more interconnected, it's also becoming dominated by big powers like the EU, US and China, these are the players that make the rules across the world that others have to follow if they want to be on good economic terms with these powers, and yes, smaller countries do have some independence to a degree, but it's a lot more limited than what people think, and if any of that were to get on the wrong side of the 3 big players, well let's just say it won't end well for the small country, and this is only going to get worse for small countries because the EU, US and China are pulling ahead with maybe India becoming part of the big club in the future, in other words, these players are likely going to dominant even more in the future. To put it another way, EU countries are not integrating more because they want too, they are doing so because of things happening around the world, the US and Soviet Union was a big push of getting the EU to where it is now, the US, Russia and rise of China is likely going to be a big push on the EU integrating further in areas like the military and forign policy matters, probably even a capital union and basically, we are reacting on need as the world changes, so expect a lot more integration, mainly thanks to the US, Russia and China.
One of the things Europe could protect itself against is geopolitical interests from India and the labour market getting flooded with cheaper workforce and therefore outcompeting locals.
Hello the "Loners" ! I am French, and I think that Europe was created so that we could compete with the other great powers. United, we are stronger! After that, it's very difficult to be able to unite, and for each country to keep its own culture. For the moment, I think we're doing well, but that's up for debate.... Have a nice day, bye!
@@s.4702 Germany had a lot of help in part thanks to the EU market, how well would Germany industry have gotten if it didn't have easy access to all other EU members? Or if it didn't have the EU that has the clout to sign much better trade deals for the EU market? Germany likely would be weaker if it wasn't for the EU. Also, you only have to look at the UK, for all the huffing and puffing about wanting to make its own laws, it's remarkable how they mirror EU rules, laws and regulations in the areas that matter, that's self-interest, independence is a bit of an illusion, that you have it to a degree, but the truth is, smaller countries have to play ball with what the big players are saying, and that's the EU, US and China for now, they make the rules that smaller countries follow, EU countries have a say in making the rules through the EU.
8:05 Because they want to keep their culture, religion, traditions, economics. And i think eropeans are much more concerned with the other country, that is much closer to their borders and currently trying to take over Ukraine.
Being more Texan than American is a healthy attitude. In the first place, you are a child of your little homeland. It doesn't change the fact that you are an American, and you will fight for America. The same is the case in Europe. First of all, I am Polish.
@07:57 It's the same principle as corporate mergers, they cooperate together to redirect competition. With solidarity nations aren't competing against each other, and racing each other to the bottom when dealing with other nations and economic blocks. ...same gist as collective bargaining. Is an insurance company going to negotiate a price for a single customer, unlikely. But if a group of customers shopped as a group they could represent a large chunk of profit. So if they all say give us a more reasonable price or we shop around, the stakes are higher so they may be more inclined to listen.
I prefer when i ask people where they are from to tell me that they are from California than telling me they are American because what does that even mean?
A problem with this dominance of a federal Europe is that both France and Germany are former conquerors and occupiers of many of the countries. And while Hitler is certainly not revered in Germany, Napoleon is still revered in France. When the 200 year celebration of the liberation of those countries came around France blocked the release of a 2 euro remembrance coin to celebrate the defeat of there national hero. I think that most are not waiting for an political domination by either of them. The current situation is not perfect, but better then an united federal European Union. After all how closer to a democracy we can get it the better, the lack of binding referendums in most and maybe all EU members states is bad enough, a higher level with even less control and oversight by the people would be worse.
@@hudy2735 Interesting reading on wikipedia about that period for these countries. I see where they benefited from Napoleons conquest and were liberated from their previous rulers/conquerers.
8:03 He meant geopolitical interests although u are totally wrong about India's military power cuz they are 4rth strongest military after USA RUSSIA & CHINA. Also India is like 3rd largest economy (ppp) So even if Europe doesn't have any military threat from India economic & geopolitical challenges will be there.
the 3rd largest economy is Germany (after that comes Japan). It is likely that sooner or later India might catch up but until now thats not yet the case. Russia is on decline either way and never was among the biggest economies (it could have been if being a western democratic liberal state but they made the mistake (as india did) and was for too long socialist driven = chance lost. and now they cannot anymore catch up due to the poor demographics and authoritarian mistakes they make - not just the war) ...
@@publicminx PPP. I already pointed it if u haven’t noticed. & i always Count PPP as its often called Real GDP cuz its counted after considering Inflations of domestic markets. For year over year growth PPP is better specially in countries like India & China which are domestic production based economies. PPP is counted considering Cost of living too. A guy in Germany might earn 5x more than Chinese but the cost of living & inflation is way higher too which Nominal numbers dont count. Anyway India will be 3rd largest in Nominal GDP very soon. Japan, Germany are very close. Point is soon India will give economic & geopolitical Challenges too.
Hi Loners! I'm french and I love my country. In France we also love our regions and their cultural specificities (I'm from Charentes-Poitou and very proud of it even if there's not much to boast about in this region). That being said, I think it's possible to become a federation like the US but it will be really really hard to find an agreement that pleases every country. For example, now that the UK left the EU, France has the strongest military and I believe our government isn't too willing to relinquish its control over our military and especially our nuclear weapons.
The US is big but you should not assume that the person on the other side knows every US state. I doubt you know all Chinese Provinces or Indian states! I definitively don't! I barely know all of the Swiss Kantons and I'm Swiss! :D
I’m just one Swede but I think I’m not alone in thinking that this is a stupid idea. Regulations that we for the most part can’t choose whether or not to follow is enough.
Imagine how difficult it would be for Sweden and Finland to become one unified country. And these countries are very similar culturally, they have almost identical legal systems and so on. If this seems fundamentally impossible, how on earth could the southern or Balkan countries be united with the northern ones?
@@E-jit There... really hasn't? I mean we treated Finland as a potential Russian invasion speedbump which was a dick move, but in keeping with the time-period as far as Great Powers go so not something uniquely terrible that we did. Which is bad, but also logical. Honestly though, Sweden brought a lot of Good to Finland as well. We dropped the ball massively during The Great Northern War, but we made up for it a fair bit during the Winter & Continuation War (during which we were NOT neutral for the record - read the history). Heck there are western regions of northern Sweden and also Scania+ Blekinge that have been Swedish for a shorter amount of time than Finland had prior to the defeat in the early 1700s. Finland was the Eastern Part of the Realm for over 4 centuries. It's not for nothing that we refer to each-other as brother peoples you know :)
Just to clarify, there hasn't been problems between us that were any different than those between other countries where one was, for a time, clearly the more powerful one governing the less so. Hell look at the commonwealth nations and Britain. Most of them don't have a terrible relation to them even now. Canada, Australia etc.
I think that further European integration is an important goal. Global challenges like climate change, mass migration, superpowers, war, pandemics, trade, will all be better handled by working together and having the power to speak as one united bloc rather than individual countries battling it out for shreds of influence. There are tensions still because the continent is still quite unbalanced in terms of HDI and GDP etc, but there has been noticeable increases in people indentifying as both their national identity AND as europeans. I'm British, and Brexit has been nothing but a disaster for us, if anything it has pushed many of us closer towards the EU due to it being unwillingly taken away from us. The bureaurocracy in the EU is often used to showcase it's negatives but i think in this instance it's a great strength; use that bureaurocracy and love for regulation to enshrine into law distinct cultural laws and devolved nation governments that will remain in charge of national policies. Traditions, cultures, languages, ethnicities, can all be respected, protected, and celebrated while still uniting under one banner on the global stage. I am English, i am also British, i can be European too.
To understand this video you should first understand the European Union. That is no small feat. Most Europeans don't even understand. One alley of approach is to look at the competences. The European Union is solely competent on only a few fields. Examples are monetary policy (through the ECB) for the Eurozone. Also Fisheries and Agriculture and International trade policies. On most policy area's the EU has mixed competence together with the member states. Environment, nature protection, social policies, etc. The EU prescribes the minimum, member states must implement that and may go further. Also there are still a few areas where the member states have the (final) say. Defence, Juridical affairs and Police/prosecution, and of course monetary policies for non-Eurozone countries. Those last areas where member states have mixed of final say prevents the EU from being a country. As you can see it is still a long way off. I hope it will become one country one day, but I don't think so. We have 21 different languages, for example, besides all the cultural differences and historical backgrounds.....
In Germany, you are better off saying that you are from California. If you say you are from America, the response will be: 'Which one? And which country?' Knowing the answer and laughing if you don't get .That is part of German dry humor, but not really good humor.
thats only the response from idiots in Germany. Smart Germans know that this stereotype comes from anti-western/anti-us bullshitters (left wings who supported back then the socialist latin american countries which are btw. less developed, have a higher crimerate and are more antisemitic/antizionist BECAUSE OF SUCH BULLSHIT) and that the usage of 'Americans' has something to do with that only the USA (United States of America) has this word in it. its just an abbreviation. Left wings tried to sell that it is arrogance of the US to use 'America' feeling superior over the other American countries. but that wasnt the real reason why the shorty 'America' was used. Long story short: like often more a primitive joke from primitive people with a lack of knowledge (while they think they have more knowledge. Typical Danning-Kruger effect cliche)
A federal EU would solve many current EU problems as long as it is build on principles of clear federalism with only elected politicians, a unitary state would not function. Also, a federal EU does not need to be a nation-state at all.
If you were to ask people shortly after the second world war, would EU countries be where they are with the political, economic system and integration that we have, most I suspect would think we were crazy and think it would never happen, yet here we are. Will further integration still happen? Almost certain? Will that lead to something like a single country? Very likely, but it doesn't have to be called a country, there are many ways and formation to achieve more or less the same goal when it comes to integration. We should also remember that EU countries are already very integrated already in a lot of the laws, rules and regulations that are made, we also have freedom of movement among the members, if you contrast that with the US and how US states are run, which in some ways have more independence than EU countries and less in other areas, but regardless, the main sticking point with the EU for now is that we are not integrated on the military, foreign policy, government and capital market, in a lot of the other key areas, we already are quite integrated, and it wouldn't take much to push that it further if there is enough political and public will among EU members to make it happen. But as I said above, there are many ways to get there and it doesn't have to be a single country to have what looks like a single country. Personally, I think EU countries will continue to integration based on geopolitics around the world, especially from the likes of the US, China and Russia, basically, we seem to change in EU countries depending on need to protect self-interest which EU members can do better though the EU in a lot of areas and honestly, EU countries are lucky that they have that option, other small countries around the world don't and are at the mercy of the big players like the EU, US and China, so self-interest will likely continue to drive further integration over the long run, even if it's something we don't want. Also, let's be honest with ourselves, do you really need to be identified as European or of the individual country when it comes to further integration on many of the things I said above? I doubt it, we've done a lot of integration already without really losing anything, and many Europeans in the EU identify as European and of their native country, is it really a big problem? Probably not, but it really depends on who you ask. At the end of the day and this is for the Eurosceptics, what are the credible alternatives to the EU? There is none, some will say we don't need the political side of the EU, but that's very short-sighted, you can't after all have an economic union without a political union that enforces the rules across all the members, otherwise one or more members could abuse that and undercut other members by changing the rules in their own country, hence why there's no such thing as a true free trade deal without the political side to go along with it like the EU members have. Without the EU, EU countries would be far more at the mercy of the US and China and both will be more than happy to abuse that situation for their own ends in all areas, politically, economically and socially for their own ends, in other words, the US likely will want European countries to weaken a lot of standards for profit motives and so on and without the EU being around, it would put far more pressure on like-minded countries around the world to do the same, and the point I'm getting at, we have little choice on this, if Europeans want to protect there political, economic and social interest, they need a strong EU, without it, we would be far weaker and you can bet the likes of the US and China would abuse that in their own geopolitical games with each other.
Thy is your family's view and yes there are others that share similar views. However, there just as many that do want that ever closer union (which has been the goal since the 1950s).
The idea of a United Europe is not such a bad one, but on condition that each country retains its own language, culture and way of life under the umbrella of a United Europe. That distinguishes us from the USA, where one main language = English, and culturally there is hardly any difference. In Europe, from north to south, east to west, different languages, cultures, ways of life. That somehow makes us special here.
There is far more "European" in Europe than you would esteem. There is the currency and parliament, which is clear. But there is also the free trade, open labor market, food regulations, a lot I don't even know and it is growing. But a "united Europe" is still far way.
The idea of ever closer union between the European states was born in the aftermath of two violent and exhausting wars that had followed a period in which the economic growth in Europe had led to an integration of the national economies the degree of which was only reached again in the 1970s. The undeniable need for close economic cooperation merged with a universal and overwhelming wish for constant peace, and this helped overcome a long tradition of defining one’s identity as an opposition to the one of your neighbours. So the starting point is not 1993, 1993 was an intermediate point. Progress since then has been marred by several factors: the first is that the most powerful of the European institutions is the council of the national governments. To really achieve a European federal state, these governments would have to surrender more of their powers. It’s unlikely to happen. The second is the number of new members who had no part in the initial process, but have long lived as vassal states of the Soviet Union. It is understandable that their appetite for surrendering a degree of national sovereignty that they have never experienced, is even smaller. The third is that with the number of different languages, democracy becomes harder. Political parties need to develop a profile to gain votes, and it is easier to do that by stressing your differences, and tapping into emotions. Tribalism and nationalism are strong drivers, especially if they combine with economic fears and interests. So while I think that the idea of a European federal state is still a strong and potentially beneficial ideal, the time window for it to materialise was effectively long closed in 1993, and it is not going to happen in our lifetimes.
What is in the treaties is "an ever closer union between the peoples", not the states. A natural process by removing the barriers therefore, but what we got instead was the unelected taking power over the democratically elected member states parliaments and governments. Democracy is not wanted by the powers that be. Through the EU we get policies no one has or would have voted for but that serves the lobbyists interests.
I don't think we need that. Actually, only two changes are needed. The unanimity principle needs to be changed. At the moment it is enough that Russia has bought one EU country (Hungary) and can thus block processes. There must also be a European army that can be deployed flexibly on the eastern border. If you look at how desolate the Russian army actually is, something like 300,000 soldiers should be enough. In addition to the national armies.
Speaking as someone who lives in a European country (Norway) that's not in the EU, I think a united Europe sounds like a recipe for disaster and a nightmare scenario. The 27 member states can barely agree today, and that's as a (supposed) trade union. Imagine what would happwned if these wildly different nations and peoles were to suddenly lose all national identity and become one. There'd likely be rioting in the streets, maybe even wars and military coups. It would rip Europe apart rather than pull it together. The EU would be dead and so would any idea of uniting Europe. The only thing stopping WWIII from breaking out if leaders in the EU tried uniting 27 nations into one, would be the fact that most of them are NATO members and are also benefitting from mutual trade and currency.
I very much doubt that a full unification of the EU - to a level like the USA - is possible soon. The national interests of the single countries a much to strong still. France for example would never agree to give up its independency, I think it would end in a new revolution if a French government would go towards that. And its not much different in a number of other countries as well. And IMHO that is a good thing. Its not desireable that a government gets too powerful. And even in the USA there are some states who are not totally happy with the federal rule. As you mentioned, Texas is the most prominent in that. From what I heard, they even have the option to leave the union, written down in the state constitution (or whatever its called), the contract that was made with DC when Texas was founded. And there are forces in Texas who want to use this option. Or California, they could easily become a independent country. They are big enough, have enough citizens and enough economical power for it. And if the s**t show in Washington continues as it currently does, I wouldn't be surprised if segregation ideas are coming up again soon.
That's the perfect day to watch this video, we are inbetween the two rounds of a snap legislative election in France, nationalists/euroskeptics are really gaining ground here. They might have more than a third of the seats next sunday. But the most important : what will happen in the Presidential election of 2027 ! As the President has a lot of Power in international affairs and Macron, which is really in favor of more cooperation is still in place for the moment. If the far right wins in 2027, this trend towards more cooperation might stop suddenly, even though of course France is not the only country in the EU, Macron has really been pushing for more cooperation and having a lot of influence lately.
Fun fact of the video: the ideal EU would be Switzerland and its respect of different languages and direct democracy; Switzerland strongly refusing to become a member of the EU for the last 32 years. What else...
There's no EU laws per say, there are guidelines and directives, that countries agree on and in some form implement in their own countries. Lot of laws are synchronized as well. EU is in a weird state of something in-between random agreements and a federation state. As for identity - US seems split until you go abroad and notice noone sees you via the state and you got more in common with people from other states than other countries (simple stuff like shows you watched as a kid or media references). With lobbying it depends - it's more susceptible to internal lobbying, but way more resistant to global lobbying. Some Apple or Facebook can bully small countries without issues, but got no chance vs a big entity like EU
The blue print for this union and cooperations in trade etc. comes from the Benelux, Low Countries; Beligium [Be], Netherlands [ne], Luxembourg [lux]. Why it also followed up with the Maastricht treaty. (Netherlands, and the capital city of my province.) The Low countries aka Netherlands, and how it came to be what it is today. Union of the Republic of the 7 Netherlands/Low countries which expanded. 1500's so long before USA became the USA; 1776. It once had 17 provinces (lands), before the Beligian Independence, and finally the Netherlands lost Luxembourg because there was no male heir after Willem III of the Netherlands died, but prinses Wilhelmina. King/prins Willem III is a very dark person so I see this as karma. Killed his father for the crown, first wife died and so did his 3 sons from that marriage. Netherlands has 12 provinces, 2 of them are separated/got split up by the border between Belgium and Netherlands; being the Province Limburg and Province Braband. Braband and Limburg where one of the biggest Provinces of the low lands (and wealthy, but also Catholic and not Protestant) before NL + BE split up. The only reason why my part of Limburg is from the Netherlands has to do with the Maas river, and wanting to own it to protect it and keep out of the hands of Prussians/Germany at that time. Everything below the large rivers in the Netherlands aka the south was part of the Roman Empire in ancient times. So we have a very complex and diverse history as a nation, and pre existence of our "nation"... Or quest/fight/war for independence from the Spanish crown/rule and the "Plakkaat van Verlatinghe" is basically the original version of the US copy pasted and translated Declaration of Independence. This European UNION, is how we could still compete with the UNION of STATES of AMERICA. The Netherlands has very dark aspects, we have goods and bads. And we had a lot to do in the creation/birth of the US nation. Fort Oranje and the first salute to the American Flag. Sint Eustatius; Plaque at 'Fort Oranje' commemorating the first salute by a foreign country to the Grand Union flag of the United States (1776) Our Royals are the House of Oranje, this fort was created by the Dutch. The first salute to the American flag given by Fort Oranje, which was a Dutch fort on Sint Eustatius, was by the Netherlands that gave this historic salute. Governor Johannes de Graaff of Sint Eustatius ordered the salute on November 16, 1776, making the Netherlands the first foreign power to recognize the American flag, and their independence. We also kept trading guns and ammo, etc. with the US despite the British ban to do so. privious to that, to you could fight and win. We where in the Anglo-Ducht wars with them, they knocked VOC from the top spot and created the East-Indian Company. VOC Verenigde Oost-Indische Compagnie one of our biggest successes in exploiting others for mega profits, the Brits saw this and thought; "We can do that too". Tulp mania, and the first financial bubble in recorded history bursting. Prosperity gospel and Calvinism. I would consider these bad parts of our history, but it is interwoven with our independence. New Netherlands, New Amsterdam, where were part of the 13 colonies of the USA, the O.G.'s. Even under British take over/rule the people where "Dutch". Many aspects of our culture got interwoven with the what is now considered American culture. Melting pot the Netherlands was long before USA even existed. We could argue that Americans are closeted Dutch, we helped you kick off the weight of the British Empire. European history is complex and has many different angles/sides to it. Within the European Union the Dutch economy is in the 5th place/spot. Which is quite special/sus for such a small nation compared to the others... all this has to do with trade and our position. World wide we are placed18th. In the E.U. listing Germany, France, Italy and Spain are placed above the Netherlands economy.
And the Russians had tried it, too. If anybody else tries again (& some EU countres that shall not be named are already almost teetering on the edge of trying), well, I really am lazy and a coward & wouldn't like to fight in any way, but as a Pole, I'd try fighting, anyway. Because nope.
Hi im from Czech Republic in central Europe and we fight for our indepedence for soo long and we was under rule of dif states in our history for soo long that we today dont want to be rule from dif state or from city far away from our coutry again so im not fan of more United Europe im more fun of more like confederacion of Europe of indepeden coutries. But sad that EU try to be central governemet and rule all of us
The UK has proved that this political union will not work and left the EU. The EU is trying to punish the UK for leaving and wso has proved how vindictive they are. Long live theKing.
The Soviet Union is the best example of how diversity can work in favor of a bigger purpose. The problem is, under capitalism is impossible to have such a thing, cause there is no sense of colective, the individual is always the priority in that system.
I don't think creating a big state with all of the EU members would work. It already doesn't work in the US and the states differ way less from each other than the EU countries. The way it is now is the right way to balance individual national interests and standardization + unification.
I can answer this question in 2 sentences. 1. Yes, if enough time passes. 2. No, unless we start speaking a common language causing our cultures to merge and blend. That's it. That's the only way outside of an authoritarian dictatorial power taking power over the entire continent and enforcing "unity" by the threat of violent punishment for "local" patriots and dissidents. So... you know, if we collectively became Russia but with an actual civilized historical heritage stretching back further than the early 1800s.
10:45 - Yeah and they were wrong by the way. As the rational and more humble ones of them have begrudgingly admitted 😅 Sorry, Brits but it's true. Which is why I would bet good money that there won't be another "Country-xit" in at least the next decade. Certainly not until Russia is no longer a threat. These right-leaning governments like to talk a lot of shit and speak to their provincial EU-critical political base, but the ones of them who have two brain cells to rub together also realize that Trade is a thing and it would severely be hindered by leaving the EU. And less trade means less gross national income, which means less taxes and less taxes mean less government money to be spent on government services which means unhappy citizens. Which means no re-election. In other words, you pander to the idiots while keeping the EU as non-threatening to national sovereignty as you can and carry on as we have for just over 30 years.
Hey little question just for fun : imagine tomorow USA have the millitary power to control the entire world what do you think will happend ? ( probably 3 times what they have now and a good anti nuclear system , its a theory question ). the awnser is of course why split the resources when you can have it all ,for social reason ? you are not socialist so as capitalist USA would want everything ^^ we are allies to america because we want it ( french ) as friends ( its our way to make alliances ) , but its probably cause we are usefull to the usa for the us side reason . Some ally are just affraid to not be , or seek protection etc ... But every country as a duty to be prepared against everything and we know peace is a matter of equilibrium if one become too strong ...
I think we Europeans are much more similar than we would like to admit. I think in the end there will be no other way than a united federal Europe with its own military. Otherwise we have no chance of competing with the superpowers and protecting our democracies and way of life.
1 not everybody share the same political views as you 2 we are not similar besides sharing history in the same continent and the same ancestral language, Spain and is nothing like Sweden. Maybe 2 countries that are neighbors are "similar" like Norway and Sweden but not all countries in the continent. 3 the continent of Europe is from Portugal to Russia and from Iceland to Greece so all those wouldn't really unite I'm sure, unless you're talking about the eu which is more of "western Europe United" 4 democracies always failed and there's infinite proof of that you just need to check history
My family are from England, Ireland & Finland. Apart from being related we couldn’t be more different. We don’t want a United States of Europe. We love each other & we love being different.
I understand your point of view. But it's too dangerous to think of not standing together. Each country in Europe individually has no chance in the global battle for resources, defense, trade routes or diplomacy. The countries individually have no weight. Historically, we have always fought with each other and insisted on our differences. Has it achieved anything? NO! Only since we have understood that we can achieve more together, even if only in a trade union and a defense alliance, have things improved. I think, in reality, we all want the same thing. Namely a good job, time for the family, healthcare and security. The EU would have been unimaginable 100 years ago. We are different and that's a good thing. But I'm not going to be held back by history that has long since passed. So why not break out of the old pattern and work together for something bigger?
Will there ever be a United States of America, maybe only in name. When I last visited US, the states i visited seemed to want to be a separate thing and not federal at all. A country this big with so many states, cant last long and will end up splitting up or at war. ( My opinion)
We are currently in a time that began years ago when nationalism is gaining strength again. The total abandonment of globalization. This is due, at least in the EU, to the war in Syria, which is still raging, the resulting high number of refugees, the pandemic, the war in Ukraine and, to top it off, the high inflation as a result of the measures taken to combat the financial crisis of 2008. It is not without consequences if you print money endlessly. The fact that nationalism is growing can be seen in many countries around the world, not just in the EU. This also includes the USA, which I classify as extremely nationalistic, disguised as patriotism, which goes against everything the USA once stood for. There are actually people who believe that we would have dealt with these crises better in Germany alone, than within the EU. This is complete nonsense. The number of people who think with their belly, instead of their head, is increasing and they are getting louder. They cry out for simple solutions. If someone wants to change the world structure, there probably hasn't been a better time to do it in a long time. One thing you should definitely keep in mind is that nationalism always ultimately leads to war. A look at history is enough.
The various nationalities and wide viewpoints means no there never will be a United States of Europe we can’t realistically keep the UK or Spain together, just look at Czechoslovakia and Romania they have had split aways, look at Belgium. No US state has seriously tried to ceced from the union since the confederacy Europeans are too diverse
If we speek german i would go for a United Europe, Englisch would be also fine but doas anyone in the EU Speeks English as Mothere Toung ? None ...? Ireland Puhh here we go.
Everybody has history. Thats not the point today, its - as it was said in the video - all about money and who has most influence inside the EU. Because no country is ready to give up its independency, and least of all France. And I think thats a good thing. A completly centralized EU federation would be much more vulnerable to be taken over by totalitarian rule. In todays EU situation there is still the possibility for countries to opt out. if things get dodgy.
It's not just British and French there's a thousand years of emotive culture and history in every country. It's not as if it just popped out of nowhere, there's real history everywhere in Europe, you can't ignore it or override it.
@@petebeatminister For the EU the money was Germany, but that's changed, with a recession and economic collapse on the horizon. So who does have the money, France wants to be in control, but they're in a meltdown right now. The EU is on borrowed time and refuses to recognise how serious it is.... But then they're embroiled in one or two wars so they may well be beyond their cognitive capacity to function. They'll run out of borrowed money pretty soon because their 7-year budget which was 3/4 new debt, that they overspent by €10 billion before the cost of the wars must be feeling the strain of all that "commitment" by the EU Commission handing over EU assets like they grow in trees.
@@a4kata40 The phrase "they have history" means they traditionally hate each other. England and France had centuries of war in their past - some cold, some hot. But even in the peace periods they didn't like each other. Totally different to France and Germany... We also had wars every now and then, and real big ones, too. And yet we are best buddies today. At least thats the official narrative.
A EU federation would boost the continents to new highs the world has never seen. But in the end, first country identity and European second. This is also the same case for North America not be able to form a union due to many factors in regulations and laws that have to be rewritten and let alone the country first and North American second.
Please the reason why the eu eec or the eu union started was to form businesses together so they do not get bankrupt by outside businesses . The uk left due to the public decided to leave and that we should leave but with trade with them and the rest of the world . he reason why we joined in the first place at the time was called the EEC as the American political wanted us to join in the first place . It was the American political elite of banks that gave money to Adolf Hitler in the first place and due to the Jews in Germany at the time was exempt from paying taxes to the allies . The Jews at the time bought companies and retail in Germany causing poverty. Why the eec was formed in the first place not so sure , but in 1992 the eu became the eu union which caused many problems of countries problems , now the right is taking over the eu union . The uk wanted to leave and we voted on it to start over businesses and trade with the rest of the world without restrictions on who to buy goods from. The real problems in modern day is companies buying other companies taking control of food and other resources and jobs are getting scarce . no i am not a socialist or a tory , we should decide on our own course and keep religion out of politics as it seems these cults have a way to make their laws within its belief and force others just like the elite and the socialists .
"Fascism should rightly be called corporatism, as it is the merger of corporate and government power." - Benito Mussolini (speaking of corporate fascism) One of the easiest ways to identify fascism is by the actions of the government. Whether it is the Chief Executive, the Congress, or the Judicial branch of government, when government takes actions to protect the power of corporations, this is a step towards fascism.
Yes there is a large and I mean LARGE amount of laws in the EU! Everything from how food is prepared to how much a country can spend. Is all limited and controlled by EU laws!
They're more suggestions than laws. Every country retains its sovereign right to either adopt or reject the 'laws'. To function as an economic trade bloc it's obviously advantageous to adopt the consensus to facilitate import/export, but not essential. Countries that don't use the Euro as their currency is a good example of this. All countries' sovreign laws override EU mandates, the opposite of the US's state laws vs federal laws. The idea that EU laws are dictated is the thinking of people who believed the lies of the 'straight bananas' nonesense. It's laughably idiotic.
People often talk about the limited benefits of the EU. But never talk about how bad the EU is in a crisis! Example… The EU Was the last place outside of Africa to get a Covid vaccine! They bankrupt Greece during the financial crisis. Originally France and Germany refused to send air to Ukraine. While Poland and other countries was throwing aid at them.
The EU could and would have been a success and supported by pretty much all Europeans if it had stayed what is was intentioned to be and not become a federal superstate as they are trying to make it now. Europe is to divided and differs to much from one country or region to the next to ever be a united country like the US, if that's even still a thing in the US.
![ลองสุ่มไอโฟน 990 โกงมั้ย? [ โกงมั้ยครับ ep.101 ] | DOM](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/bfsWe0j492k/mqdefault.jpg)
Union and united does not necessarily mean 1 country. 🤷♂
true
Yes, Brexit has turned out as a huge success story! It has proven that no country can make it on its own nowadays. Being in a strong economic (and political) union does not necessarily mean that you have to give up part of your identity. (As the US example proves). But 27 little nationalist countries are irrelevant in the global stage each on their own. A united Europe would be strong and relevant. Unfortunately our narrow mindedness in Europe lets us be irrelevant, when we could and should be a superpower!
It's not so much that no country can make it on their own, just that they are much weaker for trying, and this is for a country like the UK that isn't exactly small, so the impact is much worse on smaller countries.
Independence to me has always been an illusion, the world is very different today with how interconnected it is, the UK is finding that out the hard way that as much independence it thought it wanted, it's still very much connected to the EU out of self-interest.
Also, as you point out, even if the EU does become a single country, I see no reason why individual EU countries would need to lose their identity, there are countless ways of forming a political and economic union without losing there identity and seriously, you only have to look at how integrated EU countries are that in many areas, they are more integrated than how US states are in the federal unions, whiles being less so in other areas.
Also, let's be honest with ourselves, the US, China and Russia keeps playing EU countries off each other to try and weaken and divide us, Putin does it from the Russian side, Trump does it from the US and Xi does it from China, where do you think the far right is getting its resources from or Orbán from Hungary? The only way around that is a strong united EU, but that is seen as a threat to the other major powers.
It won't get federal on my lifetime, if ever. There's still the problem with balance, as the bigger countries try to say how they want, and others should just accept. As a Finn I'm proud of my country and would never want to see it being anything but independent. The current system works. No need to rock the boat.
Agreed. The main problem, in my opinion, is that we don't all speak the same language. The culture springs from that + history and we have far too diverse backgrounds due to that. If we all ended up speaking the same language and enough time passed I' would say a hesitant "maybe". But yeah, not in my lifetime either. Im 36.
Yeah, exactly. As a Pole, I agree. EU is already teetering dangerously close to... well, stuff. As a Pole, I'd rather fight to death than someday be in some united states of Europe. Pft
I disagree, I don't believe the current system is working particularly well, that isn't to say I want a federal Europe, but I don't think not rocking the boat is wise when change is needed.
Depends on how you look at it, but let's get this one out of the way, there's no such thing as true independence, especially for smaller countries as they are at the mercy of the ones that create the global laws, rules and regulations, so there's independence to agree, but they have to toe the line with the big powers, you want an example of that, just look at the UK, for all the huffing and puffing, they still more or less mirror EU laws, rules and regulations in the key areas that matter, and this is also the case for Switzerland, Norway and Iceland, on the surface they are independence, but in reality, they are pretty much under the EU banner.
The world is becoming far more interconnected, it's also becoming dominated by big powers like the EU, US and China, these are the players that make the rules across the world that others have to follow if they want to be on good economic terms with these powers, and yes, smaller countries do have some independence to a degree, but it's a lot more limited than what people think, and if any of that were to get on the wrong side of the 3 big players, well let's just say it won't end well for the small country, and this is only going to get worse for small countries because the EU, US and China are pulling ahead with maybe India becoming part of the big club in the future, in other words, these players are likely going to dominant even more in the future.
To put it another way, EU countries are not integrating more because they want too, they are doing so because of things happening around the world, the US and Soviet Union was a big push of getting the EU to where it is now, the US, Russia and rise of China is likely going to be a big push on the EU integrating further in areas like the military and forign policy matters, probably even a capital union and basically, we are reacting on need as the world changes, so expect a lot more integration, mainly thanks to the US, Russia and China.
One of the things Europe could protect itself against is geopolitical interests from India and the labour market getting flooded with cheaper workforce and therefore outcompeting locals.
Hello the "Loners" !
I am French, and I think that Europe was created so that we could compete with the other great powers.
United, we are stronger!
After that, it's very difficult to be able to unite, and for each country to keep its own culture.
For the moment, I think we're doing well, but that's up for debate....
Have a nice day, bye!
mes fesse oui, les seul qui trouvent de l'interet a l'europe est l'allemagne la belgique et le pays bas. fexit pour sauver la france
@@timotheelesage8470 oh please! Brexit has made it clear to everyone that we're better together.
@@timotheelesage8470 si vous êtes incompétents c'est de votre faute hein, l'Allemagne a su préserver son industrie contrairement à vous
@@s.4702 Germany had a lot of help in part thanks to the EU market, how well would Germany industry have gotten if it didn't have easy access to all other EU members? Or if it didn't have the EU that has the clout to sign much better trade deals for the EU market? Germany likely would be weaker if it wasn't for the EU.
Also, you only have to look at the UK, for all the huffing and puffing about wanting to make its own laws, it's remarkable how they mirror EU rules, laws and regulations in the areas that matter, that's self-interest, independence is a bit of an illusion, that you have it to a degree, but the truth is, smaller countries have to play ball with what the big players are saying, and that's the EU, US and China for now, they make the rules that smaller countries follow, EU countries have a say in making the rules through the EU.
8:05 Because they want to keep their culture, religion, traditions, economics. And i think eropeans are much more concerned with the other country, that is much closer to their borders and currently trying to take over Ukraine.
Being more Texan than American is a healthy attitude. In the first place, you are a child of your little homeland. It doesn't change the fact that you are an American, and you will fight for America. The same is the case in Europe. First of all, I am Polish.
@07:57 It's the same principle as corporate mergers, they cooperate together to redirect competition. With solidarity nations aren't competing against each other, and racing each other to the bottom when dealing with other nations and economic blocks. ...same gist as collective bargaining. Is an insurance company going to negotiate a price for a single customer, unlikely. But if a group of customers shopped as a group they could represent a large chunk of profit. So if they all say give us a more reasonable price or we shop around, the stakes are higher so they may be more inclined to listen.
I prefer when i ask people where they are from to tell me that they are from California than telling me they are American because what does that even mean?
Our diversity is what defines us in Europe.
A problem with this dominance of a federal Europe is that both France and Germany are former conquerors and occupiers of many of the countries. And while Hitler is certainly not revered in Germany, Napoleon is still revered in France. When the 200 year celebration of the liberation of those countries came around France blocked the release of a 2 euro remembrance coin to celebrate the defeat of there national hero. I think that most are not waiting for an political domination by either of them. The current situation is not perfect, but better then an united federal European Union. After all how closer to a democracy we can get it the better, the lack of binding referendums in most and maybe all EU members states is bad enough, a higher level with even less control and oversight by the people would be worse.
Napoleon is considered a liberator not just in France
@@DonutSquig Oke, just curious about where
@@barrygerritsen7053 Slovenia and Poland for starters.
@@hudy2735 Interesting reading on wikipedia about that period for these countries. I see where they benefited from Napoleons conquest and were liberated from their previous rulers/conquerers.
8:03 He meant geopolitical interests although u are totally wrong about India's military power cuz they are 4rth strongest military after USA RUSSIA & CHINA. Also India is like 3rd largest economy (ppp) So even if Europe doesn't have any military threat from India economic & geopolitical challenges will be there.
the 3rd largest economy is Germany (after that comes Japan). It is likely that sooner or later India might catch up but until now thats not yet the case. Russia is on decline either way and never was among the biggest economies (it could have been if being a western democratic liberal state but they made the mistake (as india did) and was for too long socialist driven = chance lost. and now they cannot anymore catch up due to the poor demographics and authoritarian mistakes they make - not just the war) ...
@@publicminx PPP. I already pointed it if u haven’t noticed. & i always Count PPP as its often called Real GDP cuz its counted after considering Inflations of domestic markets. For year over year growth PPP is better specially in countries like India & China which are domestic production based economies. PPP is counted considering Cost of living too. A guy in Germany might earn 5x more than Chinese but the cost of living & inflation is way higher too which Nominal numbers dont count.
Anyway India will be 3rd largest in Nominal GDP very soon. Japan, Germany are very close. Point is soon India will give economic & geopolitical Challenges too.
Hi Loners!
I'm french and I love my country. In France we also love our regions and their cultural specificities (I'm from Charentes-Poitou and very proud of it even if there's not much to boast about in this region). That being said, I think it's possible to become a federation like the US but it will be really really hard to find an agreement that pleases every country.
For example, now that the UK left the EU, France has the strongest military and I believe our government isn't too willing to relinquish its control over our military and especially our nuclear weapons.
The US is big but you should not assume that the person on the other side knows every US state. I doubt you know all Chinese Provinces or Indian states! I definitively don't! I barely know all of the Swiss Kantons and I'm Swiss! :D
I’m just one Swede but I think I’m not alone in thinking that this is a stupid idea. Regulations that we for the most part can’t choose whether or not to follow is enough.
Imagine how difficult it would be for Sweden and Finland to become one unified country. And these countries are very similar culturally, they have almost identical legal systems and so on. If this seems fundamentally impossible, how on earth could the southern or Balkan countries be united with the northern ones?
@@mikkomalinen2641 What do you mean? Has there been any problems between us historically? 😜
@@E-jit There... really hasn't? I mean we treated Finland as a potential Russian invasion speedbump which was a dick move, but in keeping with the time-period as far as Great Powers go so not something uniquely terrible that we did. Which is bad, but also logical. Honestly though, Sweden brought a lot of Good to Finland as well. We dropped the ball massively during The Great Northern War, but we made up for it a fair bit during the Winter & Continuation War (during which we were NOT neutral for the record - read the history). Heck there are western regions of northern Sweden and also Scania+ Blekinge that have been Swedish for a shorter amount of time than Finland had prior to the defeat in the early 1700s. Finland was the Eastern Part of the Realm for over 4 centuries.
It's not for nothing that we refer to each-other as brother peoples you know :)
Just to clarify, there hasn't been problems between us that were any different than those between other countries where one was, for a time, clearly the more powerful one governing the less so. Hell look at the commonwealth nations and Britain. Most of them don't have a terrible relation to them even now. Canada, Australia etc.
@@Zabiru- I was being sarcastic 😊
There is such disunity within Euro states, it's impossible to imagine.
I think that further European integration is an important goal. Global challenges like climate change, mass migration, superpowers, war, pandemics, trade, will all be better handled by working together and having the power to speak as one united bloc rather than individual countries battling it out for shreds of influence. There are tensions still because the continent is still quite unbalanced in terms of HDI and GDP etc, but there has been noticeable increases in people indentifying as both their national identity AND as europeans. I'm British, and Brexit has been nothing but a disaster for us, if anything it has pushed many of us closer towards the EU due to it being unwillingly taken away from us. The bureaurocracy in the EU is often used to showcase it's negatives but i think in this instance it's a great strength; use that bureaurocracy and love for regulation to enshrine into law distinct cultural laws and devolved nation governments that will remain in charge of national policies. Traditions, cultures, languages, ethnicities, can all be respected, protected, and celebrated while still uniting under one banner on the global stage. I am English, i am also British, i can be European too.
To understand this video you should first understand the European Union. That is no small feat. Most Europeans don't even understand. One alley of approach is to look at the competences. The European Union is solely competent on only a few fields. Examples are monetary policy (through the ECB) for the Eurozone. Also Fisheries and Agriculture and International trade policies. On most policy area's the EU has mixed competence together with the member states. Environment, nature protection, social policies, etc. The EU prescribes the minimum, member states must implement that and may go further. Also there are still a few areas where the member states have the (final) say. Defence, Juridical affairs and Police/prosecution, and of course monetary policies for non-Eurozone countries. Those last areas where member states have mixed of final say prevents the EU from being a country. As you can see it is still a long way off. I hope it will become one country one day, but I don't think so. We have 21 different languages, for example, besides all the cultural differences and historical backgrounds.....
In Germany, you are better off saying that you are from California. If you say you are from America, the response will be: 'Which one? And which country?' Knowing the answer and laughing if you don't get .That is part of German dry humor, but not really good humor.
thats only the response from idiots in Germany. Smart Germans know that this stereotype comes from anti-western/anti-us bullshitters (left wings who supported back then the socialist latin american countries which are btw. less developed, have a higher crimerate and are more antisemitic/antizionist BECAUSE OF SUCH BULLSHIT) and that the usage of 'Americans' has something to do with that only the USA (United States of America) has this word in it. its just an abbreviation. Left wings tried to sell that it is arrogance of the US to use 'America' feeling superior over the other American countries. but that wasnt the real reason why the shorty 'America' was used. Long story short: like often more a primitive joke from primitive people with a lack of knowledge (while they think they have more knowledge. Typical Danning-Kruger effect cliche)
A federal EU would solve many current EU problems as long as it is build on principles of clear federalism with only elected politicians, a unitary state would not function. Also, a federal EU does not need to be a nation-state at all.
If you were to ask people shortly after the second world war, would EU countries be where they are with the political, economic system and integration that we have, most I suspect would think we were crazy and think it would never happen, yet here we are.
Will further integration still happen? Almost certain? Will that lead to something like a single country? Very likely, but it doesn't have to be called a country, there are many ways and formation to achieve more or less the same goal when it comes to integration.
We should also remember that EU countries are already very integrated already in a lot of the laws, rules and regulations that are made, we also have freedom of movement among the members, if you contrast that with the US and how US states are run, which in some ways have more independence than EU countries and less in other areas, but regardless, the main sticking point with the EU for now is that we are not integrated on the military, foreign policy, government and capital market, in a lot of the other key areas, we already are quite integrated, and it wouldn't take much to push that it further if there is enough political and public will among EU members to make it happen.
But as I said above, there are many ways to get there and it doesn't have to be a single country to have what looks like a single country.
Personally, I think EU countries will continue to integration based on geopolitics around the world, especially from the likes of the US, China and Russia, basically, we seem to change in EU countries depending on need to protect self-interest which EU members can do better though the EU in a lot of areas and honestly, EU countries are lucky that they have that option, other small countries around the world don't and are at the mercy of the big players like the EU, US and China, so self-interest will likely continue to drive further integration over the long run, even if it's something we don't want.
Also, let's be honest with ourselves, do you really need to be identified as European or of the individual country when it comes to further integration on many of the things I said above? I doubt it, we've done a lot of integration already without really losing anything, and many Europeans in the EU identify as European and of their native country, is it really a big problem? Probably not, but it really depends on who you ask.
At the end of the day and this is for the Eurosceptics, what are the credible alternatives to the EU? There is none, some will say we don't need the political side of the EU, but that's very short-sighted, you can't after all have an economic union without a political union that enforces the rules across all the members, otherwise one or more members could abuse that and undercut other members by changing the rules in their own country, hence why there's no such thing as a true free trade deal without the political side to go along with it like the EU members have.
Without the EU, EU countries would be far more at the mercy of the US and China and both will be more than happy to abuse that situation for their own ends in all areas, politically, economically and socially for their own ends, in other words, the US likely will want European countries to weaken a lot of standards for profit motives and so on and without the EU being around, it would put far more pressure on like-minded countries around the world to do the same, and the point I'm getting at, we have little choice on this, if Europeans want to protect there political, economic and social interest, they need a strong EU, without it, we would be far weaker and you can bet the likes of the US and China would abuse that in their own geopolitical games with each other.
My family are English/Irish/Finnish. We love each other and we love that we are different. We don’t want a United States of Europe.
But we could scream back to Murican: ,, what the fuck is speed limit!"😂(add sound of free healthcare)
Thy is your family's view and yes there are others that share similar views. However, there just as many that do want that ever closer union (which has been the goal since the 1950s).
The idea of a United Europe is not such a bad one, but on condition that each country retains its own language, culture and way of life under the umbrella of a United Europe.
That distinguishes us from the USA, where one main language = English, and culturally there is hardly any difference.
In Europe, from north to south, east to west, different languages, cultures, ways of life.
That somehow makes us special here.
Lol rely on America comical.
I hope not. It is all the individual countries that make Europe so special.
There is far more "European" in Europe than you would esteem. There is the currency and parliament, which is clear. But there is also the free trade, open labor market, food regulations, a lot I don't even know and it is growing. But a "united Europe" is still far way.
13:21
That's my man. He's name is Olaf Scholz.
The rise of India is easy to understand if you look at the last 2-3 decades of China, but with more People.
The idea of ever closer union between the European states was born in the aftermath of two violent and exhausting wars that had followed a period in which the economic growth in Europe had led to an integration of the national economies the degree of which was only reached again in the 1970s. The undeniable need for close economic cooperation merged with a universal and overwhelming wish for constant peace, and this helped overcome a long tradition of defining one’s identity as an opposition to the one of your neighbours. So the starting point is not 1993, 1993 was an intermediate point.
Progress since then has been marred by several factors: the first is that the most powerful of the European institutions is the council of the national governments. To really achieve a European federal state, these governments would have to surrender more of their powers. It’s unlikely to happen.
The second is the number of new members who had no part in the initial process, but have long lived as vassal states of the Soviet Union. It is understandable that their appetite for surrendering a degree of national sovereignty that they have never experienced, is even smaller.
The third is that with the number of different languages, democracy becomes harder. Political parties need to develop a profile to gain votes, and it is easier to do that by stressing your differences, and tapping into emotions. Tribalism and nationalism are strong drivers, especially if they combine with economic fears and interests.
So while I think that the idea of a European federal state is still a strong and potentially beneficial ideal, the time window for it to materialise was effectively long closed in 1993, and it is not going to happen in our lifetimes.
What is in the treaties is "an ever closer union between the peoples", not the states. A natural process by removing the barriers therefore, but what we got instead was the unelected taking power over the democratically elected member states parliaments and governments.
Democracy is not wanted by the powers that be. Through the EU we get policies no one has or would have voted for but that serves the lobbyists interests.
I don't think we need that.
Actually, only two changes are needed. The unanimity principle needs to be changed. At the moment it is enough that Russia has bought one EU country (Hungary) and can thus block processes. There must also be a European army that can be deployed flexibly on the eastern border. If you look at how desolate the Russian army actually is, something like 300,000 soldiers should be enough. In addition to the national armies.
yes its called the 'european untion'
Speaking as someone who lives in a European country (Norway) that's not in the EU, I think a united Europe sounds like a recipe for disaster and a nightmare scenario. The 27 member states can barely agree today, and that's as a (supposed) trade union. Imagine what would happwned if these wildly different nations and peoles were to suddenly lose all national identity and become one. There'd likely be rioting in the streets, maybe even wars and military coups. It would rip Europe apart rather than pull it together. The EU would be dead and so would any idea of uniting Europe.
The only thing stopping WWIII from breaking out if leaders in the EU tried uniting 27 nations into one, would be the fact that most of them are NATO members and are also benefitting from mutual trade and currency.
How cool to be in the world's leading trading bloc .. oh, Brexit.
I very much doubt that a full unification of the EU - to a level like the USA - is possible soon. The national interests of the single countries a much to strong still. France for example would never agree to give up its independency, I think it would end in a new revolution if a French government would go towards that. And its not much different in a number of other countries as well. And IMHO that is a good thing. Its not desireable that a government gets too powerful.
And even in the USA there are some states who are not totally happy with the federal rule. As you mentioned, Texas is the most prominent in that. From what I heard, they even have the option to leave the union, written down in the state constitution (or whatever its called), the contract that was made with DC when Texas was founded. And there are forces in Texas who want to use this option. Or California, they could easily become a independent country. They are big enough, have enough citizens and enough economical power for it.
And if the s**t show in Washington continues as it currently does, I wouldn't be surprised if segregation ideas are coming up again soon.
That's the perfect day to watch this video, we are inbetween the two rounds of a snap legislative election in France, nationalists/euroskeptics are really gaining ground here. They might have more than a third of the seats next sunday. But the most important : what will happen in the Presidential election of 2027 ! As the President has a lot of Power in international affairs and Macron, which is really in favor of more cooperation is still in place for the moment. If the far right wins in 2027, this trend towards more cooperation might stop suddenly, even though of course France is not the only country in the EU, Macron has really been pushing for more cooperation and having a lot of influence lately.
Fun fact of the video: the ideal EU would be Switzerland and its respect of different languages and direct democracy; Switzerland strongly refusing to become a member of the EU for the last 32 years. What else...
No!! This is countries in Europe not states. And original name of the continent is Europa.
There's no EU laws per say, there are guidelines and directives, that countries agree on and in some form implement in their own countries. Lot of laws are synchronized as well. EU is in a weird state of something in-between random agreements and a federation state.
As for identity - US seems split until you go abroad and notice noone sees you via the state and you got more in common with people from other states than other countries (simple stuff like shows you watched as a kid or media references).
With lobbying it depends - it's more susceptible to internal lobbying, but way more resistant to global lobbying. Some Apple or Facebook can bully small countries without issues, but got no chance vs a big entity like EU
The blue print for this union and cooperations in trade etc. comes from the Benelux, Low Countries; Beligium [Be], Netherlands [ne], Luxembourg [lux].
Why it also followed up with the Maastricht treaty. (Netherlands, and the capital city of my province.)
The Low countries aka Netherlands, and how it came to be what it is today.
Union of the Republic of the 7 Netherlands/Low countries which expanded. 1500's so long before USA became the USA; 1776.
It once had 17 provinces (lands), before the Beligian Independence, and finally the Netherlands lost Luxembourg because there was no male heir after Willem III of the Netherlands died, but prinses Wilhelmina. King/prins Willem III is a very dark person so I see this as karma.
Killed his father for the crown, first wife died and so did his 3 sons from that marriage.
Netherlands has 12 provinces, 2 of them are separated/got split up by the border between Belgium and Netherlands; being the Province Limburg and Province Braband. Braband and Limburg where one of the biggest Provinces of the low lands (and wealthy, but also Catholic and not Protestant) before NL + BE split up.
The only reason why my part of Limburg is from the Netherlands has to do with the Maas river, and wanting to own it to protect it and keep out of the hands of Prussians/Germany at that time.
Everything below the large rivers in the Netherlands aka the south was part of the Roman Empire in ancient times. So we have a very complex and diverse history as a nation, and pre existence of our "nation"...
Or quest/fight/war for independence from the Spanish crown/rule and the "Plakkaat van Verlatinghe" is basically the original version of the US copy pasted and translated Declaration of Independence.
This European UNION, is how we could still compete with the UNION of STATES of AMERICA.
The Netherlands has very dark aspects, we have goods and bads.
And we had a lot to do in the creation/birth of the US nation.
Fort Oranje and the first salute to the American Flag.
Sint Eustatius; Plaque at 'Fort Oranje' commemorating the first salute by a foreign country to the Grand Union flag of the United States (1776)
Our Royals are the House of Oranje, this fort was created by the Dutch.
The first salute to the American flag given by Fort Oranje, which was a Dutch fort on Sint Eustatius, was by the Netherlands that gave this historic salute. Governor Johannes de Graaff of Sint Eustatius ordered the salute on November 16, 1776, making the Netherlands the first foreign power to recognize the American flag, and their independence.
We also kept trading guns and ammo, etc. with the US despite the British ban to do so. privious to that, to you could fight and win.
We where in the Anglo-Ducht wars with them, they knocked VOC from the top spot and created the East-Indian Company.
VOC Verenigde Oost-Indische Compagnie one of our biggest successes in exploiting others for mega profits, the Brits saw this and thought; "We can do that too". Tulp mania, and the first financial bubble in recorded history bursting. Prosperity gospel and Calvinism. I would consider these bad parts of our history, but it is interwoven with our independence.
New Netherlands, New Amsterdam, where were part of the 13 colonies of the USA, the O.G.'s. Even under British take over/rule the people where "Dutch". Many aspects of our culture got interwoven with the what is now considered American culture.
Melting pot the Netherlands was long before USA even existed.
We could argue that Americans are closeted Dutch, we helped you kick off the weight of the British Empire.
European history is complex and has many different angles/sides to it.
Within the European Union the Dutch economy is in the 5th place/spot. Which is quite special/sus for such a small nation compared to the others... all this has to do with trade and our position. World wide we are placed18th.
In the E.U. listing Germany, France, Italy and Spain are placed above the Netherlands economy.
The Germans already tried it and it didn't go well.
And the Russians had tried it, too. If anybody else tries again (& some EU countres that shall not be named are already almost teetering on the edge of trying), well, I really am lazy and a coward & wouldn't like to fight in any way, but as a Pole, I'd try fighting, anyway. Because nope.
Hi im from Czech Republic in central Europe and we fight for our indepedence for soo long and we was under rule of dif states in our history for soo long that we today dont want to be rule from dif state or from city far away from our coutry again so im not fan of more United Europe im more fun of more like confederacion of Europe of indepeden coutries. But sad that EU try to be central governemet and rule all of us
Exactly! As a Pole, I agree.
The UK has proved that this political union will not work and left the EU. The EU is trying to punish the UK for leaving and wso has proved how vindictive they are. Long live theKing.
its not division your talking about it would be called autonomy where region has more control of its affairs
The Soviet Union is the best example of how diversity can work in favor of a bigger purpose. The problem is, under capitalism is impossible to have such a thing, cause there is no sense of colective, the individual is always the priority in that system.
There are "federal" EU laws, but at least for some of them, some countries have deals that makes them not to have to follow them full on
I don't think creating a big state with all of the EU members would work. It already doesn't work in the US and the states differ way less from each other than the EU countries.
The way it is now is the right way to balance individual national interests and standardization + unification.
Great reaction as always guy! And may we see a Free Palestine ❤🇵🇸
I can answer this question in 2 sentences.
1. Yes, if enough time passes.
2. No, unless we start speaking a common language causing our cultures to merge and blend.
That's it. That's the only way outside of an authoritarian dictatorial power taking power over the entire continent and enforcing "unity" by the threat of violent punishment for "local" patriots and dissidents.
So... you know, if we collectively became Russia but with an actual civilized historical heritage stretching back further than the early 1800s.
10:45 - Yeah and they were wrong by the way. As the rational and more humble ones of them have begrudgingly admitted 😅
Sorry, Brits but it's true.
Which is why I would bet good money that there won't be another "Country-xit" in at least the next decade. Certainly not until Russia is no longer a threat. These right-leaning governments like to talk a lot of shit and speak to their provincial EU-critical political base, but the ones of them who have two brain cells to rub together also realize that Trade is a thing and it would severely be hindered by leaving the EU. And less trade means less gross national income, which means less taxes and less taxes mean less government money to be spent on government services which means unhappy citizens. Which means no re-election. In other words, you pander to the idiots while keeping the EU as non-threatening to national sovereignty as you can and carry on as we have for just over 30 years.
Takes some rest for a while, TH-cam can wait 👍👍
Hey little question just for fun : imagine tomorow USA have the millitary power to control the entire world what do you think will happend ? ( probably 3 times what they have now and a good anti nuclear system , its a theory question ).
the awnser is of course why split the resources when you can have it all ,for social reason ?
you are not socialist so as capitalist USA would want everything ^^
we are allies to america because we want it ( french ) as friends ( its our way to make alliances ) , but its probably cause we are usefull to the usa for the us side reason .
Some ally are just affraid to not be , or seek protection etc ...
But every country as a duty to be prepared against everything and we know peace is a matter of equilibrium if one become too strong ...
It is impossible for Europe to unite like this
Europe must be more concerned about the survival of the EU than about creating a federation
I think we Europeans are much more similar than we would like to admit. I think in the end there will be no other way than a united federal Europe with its own military. Otherwise we have no chance of competing with the superpowers and protecting our democracies and way of life.
1 not everybody share the same political views as you
2 we are not similar besides sharing history in the same continent and the same ancestral language, Spain and is nothing like Sweden. Maybe 2 countries that are neighbors are "similar" like Norway and Sweden but not all countries in the continent.
3 the continent of Europe is from Portugal to Russia and from Iceland to Greece so all those wouldn't really unite I'm sure, unless you're talking about the eu which is more of "western Europe United"
4 democracies always failed and there's infinite proof of that you just need to check history
My family are from England, Ireland & Finland. Apart from being related we couldn’t be more different. We don’t want a United States of Europe. We love each other & we love being different.
I understand your point of view. But it's too dangerous to think of not standing together. Each country in Europe individually has no chance in the global battle for resources, defense, trade routes or diplomacy. The countries individually have no weight. Historically, we have always fought with each other and insisted on our differences. Has it achieved anything? NO! Only since we have understood that we can achieve more together, even if only in a trade union and a defense alliance, have things improved.
I think, in reality, we all want the same thing. Namely a good job, time for the family, healthcare and security. The EU would have been unimaginable 100 years ago. We are different and that's a good thing. But I'm not going to be held back by history that has long since passed. So why not break out of the old pattern and work together for something bigger?
But the voting system in the USA, is like that, what does it mean a key state in representation and only two party ?
Will there ever be a United States of America, maybe only in name. When I last visited US, the states i visited seemed to want to be a separate thing and not federal at all. A country this big with so many states, cant last long and will end up splitting up or at war. ( My opinion)
Not under capitalist terms. But as long as they try anyway, at least a war between the states will be avoided.
We are currently in a time that began years ago when nationalism is gaining strength again. The total abandonment of globalization. This is due, at least in the EU, to the war in Syria, which is still raging, the resulting high number of refugees, the pandemic, the war in Ukraine and, to top it off, the high inflation as a result of the measures taken to combat the financial crisis of 2008. It is not without consequences if you print money endlessly. The fact that nationalism is growing can be seen in many countries around the world, not just in the EU. This also includes the USA, which I classify as extremely nationalistic, disguised as patriotism, which goes against everything the USA once stood for. There are actually people who believe that we would have dealt with these crises better in Germany alone, than within the EU. This is complete nonsense. The number of people who think with their belly, instead of their head, is increasing and they are getting louder. They cry out for simple solutions. If someone wants to change the world structure, there probably hasn't been a better time to do it in a long time. One thing you should definitely keep in mind is that nationalism always ultimately leads to war. A look at history is enough.
why is she always in the center of the video, and he is on the right of the screen? afraid of losing views if the video is not focused on the girl?
Um, because the video feed has to go somewhere?
@@danmayberry1185 te avec votre appareil photo
in this case, you just need to alternate in turns, there is not much gender equality.
The various nationalities and wide viewpoints means no there never will be a United States of Europe we can’t realistically keep the UK or Spain together, just look at Czechoslovakia and Romania they have had split aways, look at Belgium. No US state has seriously tried to ceced from the union since the confederacy Europeans are too diverse
Romania, always split? what are you talking about!? :)))
If we speek german i would go for a United Europe, Englisch would be also fine but doas anyone in the EU Speeks English as Mothere Toung ? None ...? Ireland Puhh here we go.
for me i say as a European is impossible why because of war, history, culture and language
No. Because the English and French have history!
Everybody has history. Thats not the point today, its - as it was said in the video - all about money and who has most influence inside the EU. Because no country is ready to give up its independency, and least of all France.
And I think thats a good thing. A completly centralized EU federation would be much more vulnerable to be taken over by totalitarian rule. In todays EU situation there is still the possibility for countries to opt out. if things get dodgy.
It's not just British and French there's a thousand years of emotive culture and history in every country. It's not as if it just popped out of nowhere, there's real history everywhere in Europe, you can't ignore it or override it.
Bulgaria is founded in year 681 we don't have history or what??
@@petebeatminister For the EU the money was Germany, but that's changed, with a recession and economic collapse on the horizon.
So who does have the money, France wants to be in control, but they're in a meltdown right now.
The EU is on borrowed time and refuses to recognise how serious it is.... But then they're embroiled in one or two wars so they may well be beyond their cognitive capacity to function. They'll run out of borrowed money pretty soon because their 7-year budget which was 3/4 new debt, that they overspent by €10 billion before the cost of the wars must be feeling the strain of all that "commitment" by the EU Commission handing over EU assets like they grow in trees.
@@a4kata40 The phrase "they have history" means they traditionally hate each other. England and France had centuries of war in their past - some cold, some hot. But even in the peace periods they didn't like each other.
Totally different to France and Germany... We also had wars every now and then, and real big ones, too. And yet we are best buddies today. At least thats the official narrative.
bit of a lip rash going on their
A EU federation would boost the continents to new highs the world has never seen.
But in the end, first country identity and European second.
This is also the same case for North America not be able to form a union due to many factors in regulations and laws that have to be rewritten and let alone the country first and North American second.
Unfortunately the answer is a definite no, never, not going to happen
Anytime a society shows any sign of weakness another will seek to exploit
EU laws are actually more guidlines, some are actual laws
answer is no. Whole video is useless.
its about money
F*@#"🔥 EU🔥
All this does not make sense
Please the reason why the eu eec or the eu union started was to form businesses together so they do not get bankrupt by outside businesses .
The uk left due to the public decided to leave and that we should leave but with trade with them and the rest of the world .
he reason why we joined in the first place at the time was called the EEC as the American political wanted us to join in the first place .
It was the American political elite of banks that gave money to Adolf Hitler in the first place and due to the Jews in Germany at the time was exempt from paying taxes to the allies .
The Jews at the time bought companies and retail in Germany causing poverty.
Why the eec was formed in the first place not so sure , but in 1992 the eu became the eu union which caused many problems of countries problems , now the right is taking over the eu union .
The uk wanted to leave and we voted on it to start over businesses and trade with the rest of the world without restrictions on who to buy goods from.
The real problems in modern day is companies buying other companies taking control of food and other resources and jobs are getting scarce .
no i am not a socialist or a tory , we should decide on our own course and keep religion out of politics as it seems these cults have a way to make their laws within its belief and force others just like the elite and the socialists .
"Fascism should rightly be called corporatism, as it is the merger of corporate and government power."
- Benito Mussolini (speaking of corporate fascism)
One of the easiest ways to identify fascism is by the actions of the government. Whether it is the Chief Executive, the Congress, or the Judicial branch of government, when government takes actions to protect the power of corporations, this is a step towards fascism.
Yes there is a large and I mean LARGE amount of laws in the EU!
Everything from how food is prepared to how much a country can spend.
Is all limited and controlled by EU laws!
They're more suggestions than laws. Every country retains its sovereign right to either adopt or reject the 'laws'. To function as an economic trade bloc it's obviously advantageous to adopt the consensus to facilitate import/export, but not essential. Countries that don't use the Euro as their currency is a good example of this. All countries' sovreign laws override EU mandates, the opposite of the US's state laws vs federal laws.
The idea that EU laws are dictated is the thinking of people who believed the lies of the 'straight bananas' nonesense. It's laughably idiotic.
People often talk about the limited benefits of the EU.
But never talk about how bad the EU is in a crisis!
Example…
The EU Was the last place outside of Africa to get a Covid vaccine!
They bankrupt Greece during the financial crisis.
Originally France and Germany refused to send air to Ukraine.
While Poland and other countries was throwing aid at them.
Yeah, right, the EU bankrupt Greece, sure, those poor Greeks had nothing to do with it, right, lol :))
The EU could and would have been a success and supported by pretty much all Europeans if it had stayed what is was intentioned to be and not become a federal superstate as they are trying to make it now. Europe is to divided and differs to much from one country or region to the next to ever be a united country like the US, if that's even still a thing in the US.