The European Union and the United States [Archive]

View Full Version : The European Union and the United States

HunterICX

10-22-16, 04:33 AM

To avoid further derailment of the Presidential debate in Vegas thread I'll started a new one to continue here:

---

What is a state but a country that has surrendered it's autonomy to a larger entity? Our commonwealth has its own legislative branch, its own exec.utive, its own judiciary, it's own flag and if the USA were to be dissolved it would become an independent nation

if the EU council where to dissolve nothing really would change either for the European countries apart that all the pros and cons of the union have dissapeared and you'll have to go back to your own agendas to keep the country running, new diplomatic relations and trade agreements have to be set up and there'll probably be an economic collapse as it may be so that countries will reintroduce their own currencies instead but I imagine that'll be the same if the USA would dissolve.

Well excuuuuse me! It is very similar and the only reasonably sized image I saw when I googled "EU flag". You forgot to say ''princess'' :hmph:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3D5tkAUNFa4

Yeah I was nitpicking but believe me I would get the same if I where to post the USA flag with less stars :O:

The point is European "states" still have moved toward becoming a country in many ways, so you should understand if we Americans start treating you as if the assimilation were complete.

Has it? One example, unlike the USA we do not have a European Passport which you can obtain everywhere in EU no in order to get my Dutch passport renewed I have to get to a Dutch Embassy in Madrid the capital of Spain. If I want to do it with Spanish authorities I have to change my nationality to Spanish :doh:
We don't have an official nationality ''European'' like ''American'' and a passport that comes with it, so much for a union eh?

The Brits are smart to get out now while they still can. Like I said a bunch of US states thought they could back out and found out the hard way that they were wrong.Time will tell, still too early to tell if you ask me. It'll be interesting times that's for certain.

We're all here to shoot the breeze. Why would we want to quit?Good point.:)

Tell that to the pound.

So, basically, what you're saying here is that the US would be a lot better if each individual state was its own country with its own military? :hmmm:

Reminds me of someone else here who argued that countries should be abolished down to the individual town and city state. Sure, on paper that might seem alright, but history doesn't work that way.

No i'm saying that there are real downsides to surrendering ones independence. Some benefits as well but liberty once given away is difficult to get back.

Well under the US consitution and being part of the union has given you liberties as well has it not? traveling over the continent jumping from state to state without problems or hassle, same currency, allowed to own a gun regarding the state you're in.

Whether they're unions or independent countries the ones in charge everywhere will always consider to gain more control in exchange of your liberties unless the masses keep the pressure on that it won't happen but even that fades away and when it's too late there's a high chance blood have to be paid to get it back and these days I wonder if the masses are willing to pay that price...the few maybe but the majority will probably just go with the current and perhaps mutter complaints about it.

Oberon

10-22-16, 06:14 AM

There's a strength in unity which I think in many instances outweighs the deficits. I'm going to go pretty obscure with my example here and delve into old British history so bear with me.

Back in the early 7th century, Britain was split into many different 'kingdoms', although the term is perhaps slightly off since they were more sub-kingdoms than actual kingdoms but that's a different matter, anyway:

http://www.earlybritishkingdoms.com/maps/images/ebk_625.jpg

You can see from the map above that the 'Kingdom' of Northumbria was pretty damn large, and the guy in charge of that at the time of that map was a chap called Edwin, and he was known as a Bretwalda which was a title given to the most powerful ruler of the kingdoms. As such he wielded considerable influence over the other kingdoms around him, not just through military but economic and political might.
Now, Edwin eventually got taken out by an alliance of Penda of Mercia and the recently exiled Cadwallon ap Cadfan of Gwynedd, but had he triumphed over them at the Battle of Hatfield Chase, he would likely have extended his control to Mercia and become a unifying force of Southern Britannia.
Now, fast forward a bit and imagine that Edwin and Edwins descendants had managed to keep that power and not fallen into the typical dynastic infighting that plagued the era. Imagine that when the North Men arrived to carve up England they had found not scattered sub-kingdoms but one unified kingdom of England...would they have been so successful?
I think not.
The same applies to an even earlier period in British history, the Roman invasion and occupation. The Romans were able to suceed so well because they faced fractured tribes which they were able to divide and conquer, playing off old rivalries against each other and eventually Romanising Britain. If they had landed and faced a united military and political force, their invasion would have been much bloodier and harder.

Von Due

10-22-16, 06:58 AM

Oberon

10-22-16, 07:38 AM

I follow what Oberon says and what he says is sound but I wonder if perhaps there would be an, in lack of better words, upper limit to how big such a "union" can be before the negative effects (bigger bureaucracy, harder to control, more susceptible to falling apart etc etc) overwhelm the positive. Consider the extreme, one unified world under one flag and administration. That, I would say, would be a proper nightmare from neverland. It is an interesting question that, how big can any union be before it falls under its own weight? What would influence that size limit?

(I now finally get the Wessex, Essex and Sussex thing but where's Nossex?

I think that there is an upper limit but I think that with improvements in technology and communication that upper limit changes, likewise with different political systems. The political system of the Anglo-Saxons for example had trouble keeping a large kingdom together, particularly after the death of the ruler (anyone who has played CK2 will know the fun of dynastic struggles) but in later years the kingdom was united, sure there were splits from time to time, but England stayed England.
Obviously there are more modern examples of the dissolution of a union, one in fact has lead to the term 'Balkanisation' and the Balkans are a very interesting example of a unified area splitting and then reuniting and then splitting again, often in quite bloody circumstances. I won't delve too deeply into those circumstances though because I'm not qualified enough to talk about the Balkans and they confuse me quite a lot.

I think ultimately though, unless we do destroy ourselves, we are destined for and should definitely aim for a unified global government. If only for the simplification of our expansion into space. I mean eventually (hopefully) we will be establishing colonies on other planets and they will eventually become self-sustaining and able to break away from Earth if they so desire, having a unified Earth response to the situation will make things easier for us to decide how to deal with things. Besides, imagine all the space programs of the Earth co-operating, all the scientists, all the resources. How much more we could achieve if we put aside the ideas of nations.
Like you say though, somewhat of a nightmare to organise, and probably something that will happen with a great struggle.

Now...Nossex, the North Saxons, that's a good question...but as far as I am aware, it never happened. The Angles spread to the north of the Saxons who came in from Kent, some most kingdoms north of Essex and Wessex were Anglian in origin up to the border between Northumberland (itself the result of the unification of the Kingdoms of Bernicia and Deira, and the Scots to the North. Meanwhile to the west in modern day Wales were the Britons who were a mixture of Irish, Roman and Brythonic people. Ironically it was the original hold-out of Celtic Druidism in the Roman era, and then became the hold-out of Christianity when the pagan Anglo-Saxons invaded. Dumnonia (latter day Cornwall and Devon) was also Brythonic but eventually became a subject of Wessex.
It was a very interesting time, moreso for the fact that we know so little about it, and I thoroughly recommend listening to the British History Podcast (https://www.thebritishhistorypodcast.com/#) for a better overview of the early history of the British Isles, it's a very good listen.

Von Due

10-22-16, 08:24 AM

I think that there is an upper limit but I think that with improvements in technology and communication that upper limit changes, likewise with different political systems. The political system of the Anglo-Saxons for example had trouble keeping a large kingdom together, particularly after the death of the ruler (anyone who has played CK2 will know the fun of dynastic struggles) but in later years the kingdom was united, sure there were splits from time to time, but England stayed England.

This is true. These are all major factors.

Obviously there are more modern examples of the dissolution of a union, one in fact has lead to the term 'Balkanisation' and the Balkans are a very interesting example of a unified area splitting and then reuniting and then splitting again, often in quite bloody circumstances. I won't delve too deeply into those circumstances though because I'm not qualified enough to talk about the Balkans and they confuse me quite a lot.

Niels Bohr once said that anyone who can contemplate the Balkans without getting dizzy, hasn't understood a word of it (close enough :D). This brings up the next point:

I think ultimately though, unless we do destroy ourselves, we are destined for and should definitely aim for a unified global government. If only for the simplification of our expansion into space. I mean eventually (hopefully) we will be establishing colonies on other planets and they will eventually become self-sustaining and able to break away from Earth if they so desire, having a unified Earth response to the situation will make things easier for us to decide how to deal with things. Besides, imagine all the space programs of the Earth co-operating, all the scientists, all the resources. How much more we could achieve if we put aside the ideas of nations.
Like you say though, somewhat of a nightmare to organise, and probably something that will happen with a great struggle.

The big question is if personal interests from some (you only need a few) will put a stop to any such unification. Some would like the entire cake for themselves and they will seek their own unions on a personal level that will benefit themselves, while trying to make life difficult for their "opponents" who will do the exact same thing. Economy and the quest for personal power and wealth are going to make a United Earth something like an impossibility, at least a stable or even remotely stable thing. I'm no expert on the Balkans either (I don't like dizzying myself) but the quest for power was definitely in the mix that blew that place up.

EDIT:
Just a bit of food for thought, over how far-seeing we humans are. In the 90's (if memory serves me right) there was a group of astro-physicists and experts on disasters and preventions of such, got together to debate what could be done if a massive asteroid was heading directly towards earth. Their conclusion was, nothing could be done as all practical solutions would be too expensive.
We are not terribly good at working for what's necessary, if that necessity will happen next week and not now.

Oberon

10-22-16, 09:08 AM

The big question is if personal interests from some (you only need a few) will put a stop to any such unification. Some would like the entire cake for themselves and they will seek their own unions on a personal level that will benefit themselves, while trying to make life difficult for their "opponents" who will do the exact same thing. Economy and the quest for personal power and wealth are going to make a United Earth something like an impossibility, at least a stable or even remotely stable thing. I'm no expert on the Balkans either (I don't like dizzying myself) but the quest for power was definitely in the mix that blew that place up.

EDIT:
Just a bit of food for thought, over how far-seeing we humans are. In the 90's (if memory serves me right) there was a group of astro-physicists and experts on disasters and preventions of such, got together to debate what could be done if a massive asteroid was heading directly towards earth. Their conclusion was, nothing could be done as all practical solutions would be too expensive.
We are not terribly good at working for what's necessary, if that necessity will happen next week and not now.

Good points, good points, certainly any unification government would be suspect to human desires and humans desire power.
One thing that I think we might see in coming years, beyond our lifetimes at least but probably not much more than a generation or two beyond, are computer based governments. Since humanity will be unable to unite itself to a point where it wishes to put others before itself, it may be left to a machine to calculate the best course of action in a situation.
Of course, such a machine would have to be strictly protected from outside interference and yet have enough awareness of outside matters to be able to make decisions based on all the information that it receives, and there is a Massive ethical problem since a machine will not take things such as empathy or emotions into account when making decisions. Decisions would be cool and calculating and it may decide to sacrifice sections of society in order to preserve more useful other sections. A sort of eugenics on steroids. So it could be a utopia and dystopia at the same time. :doh:

It's questionable whether such a thing might happen, we've had some attempts in the past, in Chile of all places with Project Cybersyn, but I think the technology is far beyond us right now. After the singularity then some things might change though. :hmmm:

mapuc

10-22-16, 11:50 AM

(thanks for creating a separat threads about this issue)

I live and have lived in two countries which are a member of EU and Schengen.

Even if our politicians should approve EU's work on making EU to one big country like USA I will always see me as Danish and Swedish-Not as an European.

From years back I have in real life and on the Internet met people from America

And most of them said or wrote I'm from Michigan or California only a few said or wrote I'm from USA/America.

This made me wonder if they, those from USA isn't more State patriotic than country's patriotic-Not saying they hate USA. Can't generalize based on some few friends though.

Markus

kraznyi_oktjabr

10-22-16, 12:25 PM

There are some major issues with computer government. First of all most likely it won't be any better than people who wrote its code. It will reflect human desires of its creators which may not be in line with most people's desires.

For example, how much weight should be in enviromental protection compared to economic interests? If interests of enviroment should be paramount, then should humans themselves get preferential treatment? If not would sacrifying humanity provide sufficient benefits for all others to justify uprooting?

Ofcourse this is all theoretical unless you also give computer power to enforce its decisions, but what if you don't? If computer can't independently enfoce its decisions, then enforcement is subject to human desires...

August

10-22-16, 01:54 PM

if the EU council where to dissolve nothing really would change either for the European countries apart that all the pros and cons of the union have dissapeared and you'll have to go back to your own agendas to keep the country running, new diplomatic relations and trade agreements have to be set up and there'll probably be an economic collapse as it may be so that countries will reintroduce their own currencies instead but I imagine that'll be the same if the USA would dissolve.

Oh no doubt it would be difficult for US states to split up now. As the saying goes the longer one wears the golden chain the more difficult it is to live without it's weight. This is why I say that it might be good thing that Britain is getting out now. However painful it'll be it will still be nothing to the pain they would experience if they waited 20 more years before Brexiting. That's assuming that they wouldn't get the same type of reaction the CSA got if they held off too long.

You forgot to say ''princess'' :hmph:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3D5tkAUNFa4

Actually I was channeling Steve Martin. Remember i'm too old for a Zelda reference. :)

Yeah I was nitpicking but believe me I would get the same if I where to post the USA flag with less stars :O:
I like to think that I would have given you a pass on it but I agree there are others who wouldn't. :)

Has it? One example, unlike the USA we do not have a European Passport which you can obtain everywhere in EU no in order to get my Dutch passport renewed I have to get to a Dutch Embassy in Madrid the capital of Spain. If I want to do it with Spanish authorities I have to change my nationality to Spanish :doh:

.....

Well under the US consitution and being part of the union has given you liberties as well has it not? traveling over the continent jumping from state to state without problems or hassle, same currency, allowed to own a gun regarding the state you're in.

Yes as I said there are certainly benefits to union but we also have to deal with the other side of that coin and live under the rule of an increasingly autocratic and overbearing national government that has got us into numerous bloody wars and foreign adventures, costs 10 times what our own states tax us and continues to expand it's power over our lives in ever more intrusive ways.

We don't have an official nationality ''European'' like ''American'' and a passport that comes with it, so much for a union eh?

Well maybe not yet but that's certainly the direction you've been moving toward, at least until the British decided to opt out. Now I'm not so sure

Time will tell, still too early to tell if you ask me. It'll be interesting times that's for certain.

You're definitely right about that. For us as well.

mapuc

10-22-16, 04:56 PM

Someone mentioned passport in European countries

Can tell you that on the top of a Danish passport these words can be read
"Den europæiske union" = "The European Union"

First a little further down on the first page the word Denmark are written.

For me it send a clear signal-The Danish politicians put EU before Denmark.

Markus

HunterICX

10-23-16, 08:03 AM

Well maybe not yet but that's certainly the direction you've been moving toward, at least until the British decided to opt out. Now I'm not so sure

Depends on how much the people are moved by next year elections in the Netherlands, France and Germany if I'm correct. Some parties like that of Wilders (PVV) which is right wing will put a possibility to leave the EU on their agenda.

Hold onto your butts I'd say. :yep:

Torplexed

10-23-16, 09:53 AM

Actually I was channeling Steve Martin. Remember i'm too old for a Zelda reference. :)

You're just a wild and and crazy guy. :)

http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com/736x/62/2a/97/622a97d0f482ce599779ae27bc09c80b.jpg

Oberon

10-23-16, 11:04 AM

The trouble is most of the leave EU types in Europe, or at least the political parties who campaign the loudest for it are...well...pretty far right wing and not exactly nice people. They tend to be the sort of people that Daesh loves to use to recruit people with, the Donald Trumps of Europe, and honestly I think trying to pander to them is a very big mistake. The drastic r (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/racism-unleashed-brexit-eu-referendum-post-referendum-racism-true-scale-of-post-eu-referendum-a7149836.html)ise in xenophobic and racist crime (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/racism-unleashed-brexit-eu-referendum-post-referendum-racism-true-scale-of-post-eu-referendum-a7149836.html) in the UK (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-37193140) post-Brexit (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37640982) has only served to underline that thought.

Rockstar

10-23-16, 12:10 PM

Oberon

10-23-16, 02:40 PM

I guess the nice people of the far left in Europe should have thought of that before they opened the borders to uncontrolled immigration. Im mean really, living in political extremes like that you're begging for trouble. It seems to me too the poltically far left nice people of Europe are not having to deal with what they expect the other people of Europe to deal with.

There is certainly an element of that, yes. I think that there is an element of blame to be laid at the feet of the left for pushing too hard and fast with their political doctrine which has helped provoked this heavy pushback.
It's not just the whole mess surrounding refugees and Islam though, it's also things like the treatment of women and homosexuality which seeps through with the hatred towards foreigners.
The cause though is not so much the concern for me, but more the consequences of such divisive attitudes spreading throughout the world.

Platapus

10-23-16, 02:56 PM

Catfish

10-23-16, 03:10 PM

We live in a time of major migration, no doubt.

Let's put aside who is really esponsible for that, because those nice guys probably don't live anymore (thanks to putting certain files away for a hundred years, like some well-developed western nation likes to sit out some.. problems), or are just out of reach for real justice.

So there are millions of people who have left their countries, either due to sheer terror in their home country (most) or to have a better chance for themselves, or their children (a lot) or some people who are just "economical fugitives" (few) or some may indeed be terrorists trying to destroy the West (very few – also i do not see how those idiots would have the slightest chance to do that – or only supporting the far right in doing so).

Apart from the last two groups, who can really blame them? We may have a probblem, but apart from some smaller events i fail to see the threat of destroying the western way of living, its political systems, or its religion.

Who has nothing to eat, lost his car, lost his house, his job or anything right now, because of the major immigrant groups?!
Who suffers so badly in "our" countries, that he can rightfully deny fugitives a - if temporary - stay?
I really do not like Ms Merkel much, but in my humblest of opinions, we already have mastered it.
There is a lot of diffuse fear, a lot of right-wingers propagating what they do since centuries, and there of course are problems in the future, but we will learn to handle them. There is no reason to cry the sky is falling, if you just use your brain and common sense.

The only ones who profit from this situation are the right wingers and uninformed persons, but why don't you just read the statistics. From immigration numbers to the countries with the highest migration, just read them. The info is all over the web.

I am really disappointed that some weirdoes obviously had the effect to convince the most stalwart country of the European union to leave it, out of fear of immigrants and "protecting its borders". For me this is nothing as hollow words, and fear, and nationalism. I would never have expected that.

mapuc

10-23-16, 03:42 PM

That's a strange way to interpret that.

First of all I was not correct. The word Denmark is right under the words "The European Union"

Second

These words "The European Union should be located at the bottom of the front page and the name of the country....at the top of the page.

When the Danish politicians put an organization like EU first before the name of their country on their passports FrontPage.

It does send me a signal-that they put EU before Denmark

Another thing

If someone somewhere in the world believe or think Europe is one country and Scandinavia is a part of it or is a country of its own, is not something that keep me sleepless in the nights.

Markus

August

10-23-16, 10:33 PM

Just for the record I do not believe that the Europe is one country. I just tend to treat them as one group in most topics, there's a difference.

HunterICX

10-24-16, 04:37 AM

First of all I was not correct. The word Denmark is right under the words "The European Union"

Second

These words "The European Union should be located at the bottom of the front page and the name of the country....at the top of the page.

When the Danish politicians put an organization like EU first before the name of their country on their passports FrontPage.

It does send me a signal-that they put EU before Denmark

Which all the EU members have done so since the 1980's when they started to harmonise the design of the passport handed out in the European Member states.

Information on the cover, in this order, in the language(s) of the issuing state:

The words "EUROPEAN UNION" (before 1997: "EUROPEAN COMMUNITY")
Name of the issuing state (similar typeface as "EUROPEAN UNION")
Emblem of the state
The word "PASSPORT"
The Biometric Passport symbol