nurizeko said:
As for a federated europe, its a fantasy, as ive always said, europe is just too diverse for this forced artificial unity called the united states of europe.
I could say the same for the USA, Canada and Australia. Either you are for the dismantling of the USA in 50 countries, or for a more unified Europe, or you would have a hard time reconciling your argument that "diversity" has any link with national government. Actually, the UK is maybe more diverse and cosmopolitan than the 10 new EU members together (not so many immigrants).
I think mac, your into this united europe thing because your always travelling, you dont seem to hold much loyalty to one nation or another, but that doesnt mean others dont, most europeans have to live in their country most if not all their lives, and hold their independence above all else.
In fact, it is because I am travelled a lot and lived in many countries, that I realised that Europe is so similar in its diversity (yes, even compared to other Western countries like the USA or Australia, but much more so compared to Asian, Middle-Eastern or African countries). My stay in Japan only reinforced my vision of unity of Europe (as opposed to Japan, China, India, Iran, the Arab World, etc.).
The different languages, the different cultural sensitivities, sensibilities....geography, its just not practical this united europe lark, to keep europe united in such a federation would take so much paperwork, it would collapse under the weight to try and accomadate everyone, and if it didnt, it would be effectively applying a totalitarian repressive one size fits all crap. And people would feel opressed.
For your information, the USA is 3x bigger than the EU in land area. Does that mean that it is "effectively applying a totalitarian repressive one size fits all crap" type of system ? India has 22 official languages, and each state ha its own official language, like in the EU. What makes India more a country than the EU now ? Note that for me, the EU already
is a country (yeah, it's written on my passport and driving licence, and yours too, which is the exact same colour and design, by the way). There is no need to change the government dramatically. In Belgium, states like Flanders and Wallonia have about as much power or freedom as EU-member states have from the EU institutions, if not more. That shows me that the "EU to member states" relation is pretty much the same as the "member states to regional states" relation. That's why I call the EU a "dual federal system" (i.e. there are 3 levels of parliament : EU, member-state, and in some cases regional ones too, like in Scotland).
The united states works because the vast majority of its "states" are comprised of english speaking western europeans who have had to adapt to one culture in the process of imigration and settling.
India and China are more diversed and bigger in land area than the EU...
I guess the lowland countries (netherlands, belgium the such) are more keen on a united europe because these countries are constantly getting invaded by one european power or another, or wars taking place there, but other parts of europe have had more stable histories to establish their own identities and cultures and languages.
Then why don't British people feel even more European than Benelux people then ? After all, Britain was first settled by the (black-haired) "original Britons", the by the (red-haired) Celts (from the continent), then by the Romans (from Italy), then by the Anglo-Saxons (from Northern Germany and Netherlands), then by the Vikings (from Scandinavia), then by the Normands (from France again). After that came a wave of immigrants from the whole world, especially South Asia, Africa and the Carribeans. In my eyes, Britain is more ethnically and culturally diverse than almost any other EU member state. Which Eu country can boast 6 official languages like the UK ? (including to extinct ones !)
If a federated europe comes to pass, its going to have to effectively crush and opress the local culture and national identity if it stands any serious chance of maintaining its existance, and that, people, is what we call totalitarian opressive regimes, like the soviet empire orthe chinese in tibet, and as we all know, all empires eventually collapse
In a non democratic system, I agree with you. Had all Europe been unified by one European country (e.g. Napoleon's France, or Hitler's Germany), it would have become as you describe. But European countries peacefully decided of their own will to unite (like the 13 original US colonies) and found a common government (the EU Commission), parliament, court of justice, and
many other institutions. The local cultures have not been crushed. On the contrary, the EU, which promotes diversity and mutual understanding from its very roots, allowed "oppressed" regions of Europe (Basque country, Corsica, Northern Ireland...) to feel more themselves, get more autonomy from the member-state's government, revive their language (e.g. Wales, Ireland, Baque country...), and get development funds that their member-state's government wouldn't grant them. The EU also finances cultural exchange programmes to promote the learning of other EU languages, and mutual understanding. Any European who has been to university will know about the
Erasmus/Socrates programme. But how many know that this mostly free exchange programme between EU universities exists thanks to the European Union ?
No country has ever been formed from the common will of many existing countries to merge into a federal system. The EU is unique and cannot therefore be compared to past, totalitarian "empires". I love learning about the world, governments, history, etc., and the EU has the merits of protecting cultural diversity better than any other countries have done it before. It is partly thanks to the EU that Scotland got it's parliament and autonomy from the UK, that Welsh and Irish Gaelic are taught at school again (when they had been banned for so long by the British government). Don't delude yourself, the UK could not be as tolerant as it is now without EU pressure.
Do not confuse the people at the EU with those of member-state governments. Their interests are different. The UK would always oppose the independence of Northern Ireland, because it is not in the interests of the politicians and civil servants in London (who can levy taxes on Northern Irish citizens). But seen within the EU, it doesn't matter whether Northern Ireland be with the UK, with the Republic or Ireland or alone. That's why the EU can truly give people what they want, but narrow-minded member-state government, concerned with their own little power, can't.