The United States of Europe

[one very bored guy]

Originally Posted by The Dear Leader

Thanks for backing me up...because this is what I wrote earlier on in this thread. You can either look at regional values (not national ones), or you have to include the entire western world. There simply is no such thing as distinctively European set of values, ie a set of values shared by a majority of Europeans and only shared by them.

But again, what has this to do with defining a country. These differences exist in single country's such as Germany with the North/South divide. They exist in the US, between the conservative and liberal states, they exist everywhere. You were originally trying to say that Northern Europeans have a different culture to Southern thus they could never be a single country, and yet here you are saying that different cultures don't make any differences. I am very confused.

Originally Posted by The Dear Leader

Don't really understand what you're getting at here. Yes, being part of a nation is something that you feel, it can be something as mundane as having a certain feeling (or no feeling whatsoever) when listening to the national anthem. The "European anthem" has no meaning to me for example.

You are quite right here as far as personal perception is concerned. But keep in mind, this is purely personal perception. In your's that you feel your national anthem has more meaning. I am sure there are many Bavarians in Germany who won't agree with you, and still believe Bavaria should have remained a seperate nation. The same goes for Spain. There are many Spanish living in Barcelona that would stand by the Spanish national anthem, and many that would not.

Of cause very few people comparatively feel nationhood with the EU and the EU national anthem, because the EU is still both so new, and not yet a full nation. But do you honestly think when Germany united, overnight every single person felt German? Do you believe that when the Southern States lost the civil war to the North, they all stood up to the Star Spangled Banner and felt proud to be American?

Nationhood takes time, usually generations, and considering the EU isn't even a nation yet, it is quite amazing to see how many people, even if in the large minority still, already feel part of a united nation - despite it not even being one yet.

[The Dear Leader]

Originally Posted by one very bored guy

Afterall, if you only need to name language, then it has been proved that many country's exist with multiple languages.

Besides, a typical young person from Barcelona can communicate with a typical young person from Stockholm in English.

And this means they have to live in the same country? I can communicate with lots of people all around the world but that doesn't mean I necessarily would want to live in the same country with them.

Besides, for every successful multilingual country (India), there are numerous examples where it didn't or isn't working out too well (Belgium, Spain, Yugoslavia, Canada).

These differences exist in single country's such as Germany with the North/South divide. They exist in the US, between the conservative and liberal states, they exist everywhere. You were originally trying to say that Northern Europeans have a different culture to Southern thus they could never be a single country, and yet here you are saying that different cultures don't make any differences. I am very confused.

I was saying that the differences are bigger than in the US, largely because Americans consider themselves to be part of a single nation/country.

And where exactly did I in that post say that different cultures don't make any differences? The point I made was that there are not distinctively European values.

But do you honestly think when Germany united, overnight every single person felt German?

Germans wanted to live in a united country, that's the difference between the EU and Germany in the 1800s. People were more than happy to finally see a united Germany back then, largely because they felt that they were part of a single nation.

[pricemazda]

But also it was the perceived weakness of the German states in the international system with Russia, France and the UK all direct competitors. Identity is usually formed in opposition to another country. Irish identity against the UK, Soviet against the USA.

Hence why integration in europe was strongest during the Cold War.

[one very bored guy]

Originally Posted by The Dear Leader

And this means they have to live in the same country? I can communicate with lots of people all around the world but that doesn't mean I necessarily would want to live in the same country with them.

Besides, for every successful multilingual country (India), there are numerous examples where it didn't or isn't working out too well (Belgium, Spain, Yugoslavia, Canada).

From memory, you pointed out that a different language is all you need to say how people across different country's in Europe are so different that they couldn't possibly form a single nation.

My point was that there are many country's that are successful as a single nation with more than one language, and they do include Belgium, Canada, Spain etc. My point was that you don't need a single language for a single nation, and that has been proved in reality.

Originally Posted by The Dear Leader

I was saying that the differences are bigger than in the US, largely because Americans consider themselves to be part of a single nation/country.

And where exactly did I in that post say that different cultures don't make any differences? The point I made was that there are not distinctively European values.

But what exactly is your point. Of cause there are no single European values. There are no single American values, or German values etc. So what are you trying to say? That the EU could never become a single nation because there are no single distinctive European values, yet single nations themselves have no single values.

Originally Posted by The Dear Leader

Germans wanted to live in a united country, that's the difference between the EU and Germany in the 1800s. People were more than happy to finally see a united Germany back then, largely because they felt that they were part of a single nation.

Hey, did you personally ask all Germans if they all wanted to live in a single united country? Germanys borders have changed many times since 1815, and from loose collections to various republics. Don't tell me every single German then and today had exactly the same idea's of nationhood!

[The Dear Leader]

Originally Posted by one very bored guy

But what exactly is your point. Of cause there are no single European values. There are no single American values, or German values etc. So what are you trying to say? That the EU could never become a single nation because there are no single distinctive European values, yet single nations themselves have no single values.

The point some people are trying to make is that those values do exist though and that this shows that there is an all encompassing European identity. I just disagree with that, nothing more.

Hey, did you personally ask all Germans if they all wanted to live in a single united country?

Come on...a majority of them was in favor of it. Next time you make a statement along the lines of "Europe's in favor of blahblah", should I also ask you if you've asked all Europeans?

Germanys borders have changed many times since 1815, and from loss collections to various republics. Don't tell me every single German then and today had exactly the same idea's of nationhood!

I'm not saying that it is the case, the point simply is that back then people were largely in favor of a united Germany, something which isn't the case if you look at Europe today.

[jan966]

United Europe will inevitably lead to the new war in Europe.

[jan966]

Originally Posted by one very bored guy

Hey, did you personally ask all Germans if they all wanted to live in a single united country? Germanys borders have changed many times since 1815, and from loose collections to various republics. Don't tell me every single German then and today had exactly the same idea's of nationhood!

Germany did not exist in 1815. What borders are you talking about?

[Swede]

I've never understood that "it'll lead to war"-mania. Why would it? Most of Europe (population-wise) is already united in a confederation today...

Germany did exist in 1815. Just not as a nation-state. In the last thousand years there's also been a kingdom of Germany and, more well-known today, the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation.

[one very bored guy]

Originally Posted by jan966

Germany did not exist in 1815. What borders are you talking about?

Forgive my history on Germany, I was never taught in school, but from what I thought I knew, in 1814 the German Confederation was founded, which was league of 39 seperate states. In many ways, it was a trade pact not to dissimilar to the EU. My point was then, how many actually felt "German" and united with all the other states.

Later on, they formed a single nation in what, 1871? (although by then the borders were different from memory). Between the date of the German Confederation and Empire was 57 years. I am sure that at the point of the German Empire starting in 1871, a great deal of the population was not 100% behind the idea.

The EU started as the European Economic Community in 1957, 49 years ago. There are indeed simularities to some degree here, although the EU is a damn sight more peaceful.

[one very bored guy]

Originally Posted by jan966

United Europe will inevitably lead to the new war in Europe.

And you base this on what exactly? Do you feel the need to kill people from your neighbouring country's?

[jan966]

Originally Posted by one very bored guy

And you base this on what exactly? Do you feel the need to kill people from your neighbouring country's?

There is more than one mechanisn that will lead inevitably to war. Some states will be still out of a united Europe, for example UK, Ukraine, Turkey, Serbia. The will be blamed and victimised. And will be looking for a coalition of states against Europe. Russia, US will be more than happy to intervene.


Will we have US bases still in Germany? I hope so. Otherwise civil wars are sure.

[downtown_meltdown]

Originally Posted by jan966

United Europe will inevitably lead to the new war in Europe.

Although one cannot entirely exclude the possibility of a military conflict between EU nations or countries, I find it quite improbable at this stage of unification. Time will tell.

[downtown_meltdown]

Originally Posted by R@ptor

[...]
I guess we'll have to disagree here. From Heidelberg it's a 30 minute drive to France, a 2 hour drive to Luxembourg, a 2hour 30 minute drive to Switzerland but a 9 hour drive to northeastern Germany. If I drive those 30 minutes into France, the villages and towns look the same as they do on the other side of the border, restaurants serve the same food, the people share many values and opinions and so on. Even the language is no longer a problem since nowadays everyone under the age of 50 speaks English. Now if I drive to northeastern Germany (for example West Pomerania), I could just as well be on the other side of the world. The people may speak the same language, but everything else is completely different. The values, opinions, even the heritages are quite different.
[...]

Would you support the deunification of Germany under the auspices of the EU then?

[one very bored guy]

Originally Posted by jan966

There is more than one mechanisn that will lead inevitably to war. Some states will be still out of a united Europe, for example UK, Ukraine, Turkey, Serbia. The will be blamed and victimised. And will be looking for a coalition of states against Europe. Russia, US will be more than happy to intervene.


Will we have US bases still in Germany? I hope so. Otherwise civil wars are sure.

No, I don't think there will be war. War is bad for business when attacking your main trading partners. Europe is also quite anti-war, people here don't even like going to war with countries like Iraq, let alone our neighbours.

There will be no further wars in Europe and of that I'm pretty damn sure.

I think you maybe a tad paranoid. What country do you live in anyway?

[jan966]

Originally Posted by one very bored guy

No, I don't think there will be war. War is bad for business when attacking your main trading partners. Europe is also quite anti-war, people here don't even like going to war with countries like Iraq, let alone our neighbours.

There will be no further wars in Europe and of that I'm pretty damn sure.

I think you maybe a tad paranoid. What country do you live in anyway?

People who want to make war will never say this. They will say exactly what you are saying. Just count how many EU troops were killed in the last 15 years (also in Europe), I think several hundreds or more, and what is more interesting how many people were killed by peacefull EU troops, surely hundreds of thousands.

[SHiRO]

[FREKI]

Originally Posted by jan966

Some states will be still out of a united Europe, for example UK, Ukraine, Turkey, Serbia. The will be blamed and victimised. And will be looking for a coalition of states against Europe. Russia, US will be more than happy to intervene.

Dude how do you expect anyone to take yous serius, when you think the UK isn't a part of the EU???

As for the rest of your cr** I won't even waste my time commenting, because dude... that's just pure BS!

[Metropolitan]

Originally Posted by Exarchus

No, Metropolitan knows what I'm refering to.

He was talking of TF1 and the news on it (Jean Pierre Pernaut being the guy the French see for decades)


The first post, with the articles, was for you as you asked what was on the top news.

The second one was for Metropolitan. As to compare medias let's take the most followed ones.

Actually, I was referring to 8 pm news. As much on TF1 than on France 2. I visited my brother in Australia this summer, and there's an Australian channel broadcasting news from several countries in the morning. That was during the conflict in Lebanon. Every international TVs were talking about it during half of the news. As for the French TV news (France 2), it made only 5 minutes, the rest being about gellyfishes on the French Rivieira and restaurants complaining about the lack of clients in Normandy.

[Metropolitan]

Originally Posted by Swede

I've never understood that "it'll lead to war"-mania. Why would it? Most of Europe (population-wise) is already united in a confederation today...

Indeed, I totally agree with you.

European countries could offer themselves to declare war to each others at a time when the rest of the world was irrelevant. This has stopped 60 years ago when Russia and the US have proven to be much more powerful than any country in Western Europe, if not Western Europe as a whole.

It's not peace which is at the origin of the European unification, it is actually war. World War 2 made realize to Europeans that in fighting against each other they were mutually weakening themselves.

In the globalized world of the 21st century, which will see many superpowers rising, European countries can only defend better themrselves in getting closer to each other. Saying that our little independent country representing less than 1% of humanity could do as good if not better than with the EU is nothing else than wishful thinking.

[one very bored guy]

Originally Posted by jan966

People who want to make war will never say this. They will say exactly what you are saying. Just count how many EU troops were killed in the last 15 years (also in Europe), I think several hundreds or more, and what is more interesting how many people were killed by peacefull EU troops, surely hundreds of thousands.

Were they killed in an EU country?

No.

We are talking the EU here. So, you didn't answer my question, what country are you from, do you live in?