NationStates Jolt Archive

Can any of the posters envisage a full, or partial political union of the EU member states, and if so, what sort of state would it create?

I'd like to see an E.U nation it would be an awesome superpower (in fact economically China and America will get left in the dust) but it will have to be a confederacy (at least in the immediate future)

We have a partial political union today.

If you mean do I think that EU will ever become a single state? No, not any time soon, especially post-expansion. The new member states especially would be incredibly reluctant to cede more soverignty to Brussels... they only recently got it back from Moscow! They also tend to be more sceptical of the EU than many of the older nations. Plus, here in the northern Europe, we are quite sceptical of the EU ourselves.

Also, an EU superstate would require cross-border politics. I can't imagine how the citizens of 25 countries would ever find a single figure to elect as President, or whether a truly unified system of political parties could be set up to span 25 countries with many different traditions, cultures and languages (they'd have to be far more unified than the European Parliament groups).

EU, European Union. EU Union is something like USA of America. Sorry for nitpick.:rolleyes:

EU, European Union. EU Union is something like USA of America. Sorry for nitpick.:rolleyes:

I did realise after I posted.

EU, European Union. EU Union is something like USA of America. Sorry for nitpick.:rolleyes:

Brought to you by the department of Redundancy Department.

a federal EU is something to look forward to imo - and something that hopefully will happen dispite the outdated complaints about 'loss of sovereignity' that the patriots and xenophobes spew. it'd be federal i would believe, with an overarching supranational (federal) government and devolved power to the states (current nations).

its not such a crazy idea: just look what unification of the disparate states did for the USA.
the problem a federal EU would face is primarily that of a slow-response labour market, and low labour mobility - both already evident in the EU and caused mostly by social factors and the language divide... but these are problems that can be overcome in time. 200+ years ago one might have claimed the states of the US were too different to work effectively together in a union - that it would be impossible - and the same false prophecies are being bantered about with regard to the future of the EU by the sadly misguided today.

thats the way i see it anyway ;)

besides, apart from anything else, china will match the US' economy in 25 to 30 years, india not far behind. if europe is to maintain its living standards and remain a player in world economics and politcs, we're going to have to come together ever closer. our little countries just can't survive on their own anymore...

judging from the 'no' referendum votes on the constitution.... don;t know if it'll happen....

While economic union is necessary, I'm completely 100% any political union and a federal Europe. All it would do is add another unnecessary layer of government that is even further removed from the public than now.

Brought to you by the department of Redundancy Department.

Quality reference.

Now? No. A good number of the governments and a strong majority of the population would be opposed to such a move.

Maybe within the next four or five decades.

I personally fundamentally wouldent mind a european country, its happened before under the romans but, i dont want it united as it is at the moment.

The members squabble all the time, beaurocracy (cant spell it) is huge and as people have said before, there is allways resistence to it. Also the fact that some member countrys insist on subsidising there textile or agriculture industrys, which to a delevloped region like europe, is not competitive to make/produce, rather then importing.

As for the language problem, one language. persoanlly i say english, its widely used and spoken and is the administitive language of the EU. If people dont want that, latin is good because most european languages are derived partially from it.


Its obvious smaller countrys need to merge to stay competitive, and if the EU dosnt shape up id rather be the 51st state of the USA (im english btw) then in the EU.

If the EU changes , then im all for the USE or whatever it would be called, britian alone ,and the other memebers, would just be steamrolled by other, larger countrys eventually unless they unite. (sorry to keep speaking about classical civilisation here but, the greeks in 200 BC are a good example, to keep the rising roman empire at bay, they needed to unite. They didnt, they squabbled and the romans , a larger country, conquered them. greece is comparible to europe)

sorry, didnt really answer the question. What kind of state would it be?

Representative democracy, id say its too big for a direct democracy. But, with a nation that size , and the fact it would be so young with initially such weak bonds..... i woudent at all be shocked if it turned into a totalitarian democracy.

I'm a European federalist myself. I think there should be a European State, a european constitution, a european government, and a european prime minister. ASAP.

I'd like to see an E.U nation it would be an awesome superpower (in fact economically China and America will get left in the dust) but it will have to be a confederacy (at least in the immediate future)

By no means would an "EU" superpower leave the US in the dust. The US has a unique convergence of alot of different items needed to be a "Superpower". Land(lots of undeveloped land). Free and stable united government. Natural resources that are abundant. Powerful technological advanced military to keep the peace.

Now the EU is developed in a way that the maximum potential for the member states will not exceed a comparible counterpart in the US or China for that matter.

The EU also couldnt stop bickering enough between member states to resolve any real tough pressing issues.

The developed land in the EU is higher than the developed land in the US and China to some extent. US has a greater end growth potential than the EU or China due to its agrigarian and mineral/fuel wealth. China is the weakest by far in this 3 way duel.

Militarily the US is ahead of the game at this point and is always developing new tech to put itself ahead in the future. China is trying to develop tech but is far behind the US and EU standards. Although the ability to steal tech is second only to the Russians. EU has no solid military establishment that isnt linked to the US. The British have superior weapons than the rest of Europe only in my opinion because of joint cooperation with the US.

Just a passing observation of the facts between the EU, China and the US. Yes I have been to majority of the EU countries. Also been to China several times. Limited to Hong Kong and short trips inland though.

I'm a European federalist myself. I think there should be a European State, a european constitution, a european government, and a european prime minister. ASAP.

IMHO, too much bad history. Not going to happen for another century, at least.

IMHO, too much bad history. Not going to happen for another century, at least.
Oh I don't even want to talk about the hurdles and the dificulties... it's practically impossible. The individual nations will never want to give up their sovereignty. It's like creating a nation backwards. It'll probably never happen.

I still believe in it though.