View Full Version : U.S. of E?: Can Europe all subscribe to the same constitution?
29th October 2002, 02:46
Is it truly possible for all of europe to federalize under one president, or do the different countries hate each others language, history, and women too much for this to happen?
29th October 2002, 03:19
Wrong spot, bubbilah. I'm afraid this one will go over most people's heads :igor:
29th October 2002, 03:25
Probably over most North American heads; i'm sure most Europeans have an opinion on the issue though.
29th October 2002, 03:29
Most of them are British :blah:
29th October 2002, 03:58
No, I don't think that they will be able to be lead all by one leader, the reason is because there's just soo many different conflicts with each of the countries and each of them have a very long distinct and old history. Pride will get into them. Watch, it's going to be Europes version of the United Nations.
29th October 2002, 04:16
Europes version of the UN is the EU;
this new agency discussed in the article would have much broader power...
29th October 2002, 04:32
The benefits are so immense and numerous that a political union is only a matter of time.
29th October 2002, 04:47
Equally as immense and numerous is mutual xenophobia and fear of immigrants....
29th October 2002, 04:53
Do you mean between member states now? Or from outsiders of the union?
you have to remember how much hatred existed between the states before the USA united as one nation, also note how much progress that the European states have made since the EU was still the EC 30-odd years ago.
None of the things that have been achieved now was ever thought possible. They've reduced trade barriers, created a uniform currency and they are continuing to standardize even more- there are plans to regulate tax- and interest-rate, accounting practices and other interstate financial transactions. The states are moving closer and closer and are becoming more dependent on one another.
I think the nation states will realize the benefits of political union eventually.
29th October 2002, 07:11
As of now, to me, Europe is only an economic entity whose pretentious purpose is to compete with the USA. They can't make it work properly with 15 members, yet they are willing to add 10 more countries. :rolleyes:
This constitutional thing is just one more toy thrown into the mix.
29th October 2002, 07:15
No. Not until we all speak the same first language can this be pheasble.
It is my opinion also, that the single currency can only do well if there is a single unified govenment, but thats another matter.
29th October 2002, 08:13
I think Europe could learn to co-exist, so long as this "United States of Europe" doesn't become an oligarchy run by the bigger, richer states (ie, France, GB, Germany, etc.). Each state needs to have an equal voice.
29th October 2002, 08:22
I think that euros have worked just fine. But I agree that each country should be equal.. I doubt that it won't ever be that way though..
29th October 2002, 09:19
I don't believe here is going to be just one country in EU area. Some things are really good like Euro as our currency. But it's a miracle if EU is one country some day.
29th October 2002, 09:43
aye, well, in the UK right now there are many states asking for independance, many pressure groups to devolve within the UK - now if europe were to become some "super-state" there'd be widespread problems and dissent. a single president would be difficult to administrate too, as people would almost certainly simply vote for candidates from their own country. that said, the EU does need to radically change itself - its policies in place right now (the common agricultural policy in particular) are rife with corruption and easy to cheat. the EU needs to stop implementing shoddy, poorly thought-out policies and start taking some real actions that will benefit people. there has been some successes already, and the EU itself is a good idea (and if it were practicable, i would be in favour of a single european state) - but despite this, there needs to be some major reforms made to the way the EU operates.
29th October 2002, 11:45
The other thing about Britain is that we have managed quite nicely for 1000 years without any form of constitution. If we get annoyed with each other, we batter each other about a bit (or the Irish), shake hands and go home.
But seriously, I do not think that a common constitution could possibly work. Each country is in the EU for different reasons. The French because they get lots of money from the CAP and the chance to stick the boot in at the US. German were pretty much forced into the EU (or as it was in its earliest for the ECSC) so that they wouldn't invade France again as the two were locked by economic treaty. The rest of the countries have their own gains out of the EU, and none are really closely linked enough to cooperate to this degree.
If you want further proof, look at the amount of disjoint between members over the European Rapid Reaction Force. No-one can agree anything about this, so how are we supposed to be able to cooperate on something as fundamental as a Constitution?
29th October 2002, 11:55
There would be a problem with all nations under teh same constitution the American in particular, simply cause the US constitution includes God, thats already a big topic in within teh USA, every nation has their own belives and ideals.. so complications and arguments would coem up to i belive:igor:
29th October 2002, 12:02
The American Constitution was formed when Church and State were closely tied. In the current era, the church has almost no say, apart from a few ceremonial duties (at least in most countries), so the church would not come into it, other than it would include some of the Human Rights things about freedom of religion et al.
29th October 2002, 12:14
Hm, i still think some editing would take place, because other countries would have their say on its contents, even now the USA edits it, as for religion im not fresh on my constitution wording but the word God apears in there..
to be politically corect they might flush that out, I personaly like the fact its there but im just one person, nations including ours would have to agree on this sort of thing
29th October 2002, 14:12
It seems that the UK's working classes generally have a higher percentage of Xenophobic members than anywhere else. It seems to be an 'accepted standard' amongst them and their peers for them to hate everyone with whom Britain has historically fought. And especially France, Germany and the USA. It comes from their narrow-minded bigotedness and stubborn refusal to accept the modern political environment.
Anyway, my point is, if these people are to vote on such an issue, it would be wise not to place any bets on the outcome.
29th October 2002, 14:16
that said, these conditions and xenophobia are reflected in many countries, including france, austria and the USA. i'm yet to see evidence that the working classes here are worse.
29th October 2002, 14:27
This idea is stupid, its just for France and germany, Like the euro was good for germany because their economy was failing.
The Uk needs to stay out (we own everything anyway). A USE (USE??? wtf) would be disastrous, We need to declare war against them, France sucks. I'm not working class either, so you cannot generalise that. Many upper and middle like i do not wish to be part of the EU
29th October 2002, 14:47
you're mad, son. i like the cut of your jib. we could do with people like you in the british national party. let's kill all those nasty unwashed foreigners!
29th October 2002, 15:18
Originally posted by Xerxes
Probably over most North American heads; i'm sure most Europeans have an opinion on the issue though.
You are probably right here. I, being a member of the USA in all of it's ying and yang, have a hard time formulating an opinion on this matter with any kind of foundation.
29th October 2002, 17:39
USE - good idea, never work in practice.
Europe is made up of countries with too many historical and cultural differences for an USE to ever work effectively.
How many languages would a President of the United States of Europe be expected to fluent in? All the languages of all the countries of the USE. It could never just be English, as the French detest the English language and it could never just be English and French because then the Germans would get pissed off, then what about the Italians and the Spanish and so on. So this role could only be filled by a politician fluent in about 20 languages, and I find this unlikely as the current President of the USA is barely fluent one language. :D
Successive American administrations have support a United States of Europe as they would like to see a Europe that could pull its weight in world affairs (i.e. militarily). As at the moment the only country able to offer the US any support is the UK (and this is really just moral support). While Germany the worlds 3rd biggest economy and a country that the US put a lot of resources into during the cold war doesn't even what to offer moral support. (Though the Germans may be right about not going to war with Iraq, you don't go about saying this by comparing the US President to Hitler, as the English would say "It's just not cricket".)
So in reality the most the EU can hope to be is a glorified free trade zone. (And generally it would probably be best if it kept it simple and stuck to being a free trade zone)
29th October 2002, 19:19
A USE could work very well as a very loose federation. I like how you put it; "a glorified free trade zone". Very much like what the Southerners were aiming at with the Confederated States of America.
29th October 2002, 23:04
"as the French detest the English language "
sorry but it's false
i'm french a make translation (lot's of) so i can't speak about what i'm know
The frenchies are too lazy to learn or to make an effort to speak english
..and perhaps they don't learn :)
29th October 2002, 23:44
Maybe not in the general vein of this thread but whats wierd to me is :
Under european law ,(i.e. the basic law of the assembly)it si said that if two member states (as Each individual country is known) are in conflict with each other,then they have to be suspended,booted out until they sought it out .
Also no country can be or join in the union if they are allready in conflict.
In that then Europes own basic principle of foundation in law is illegal , as most if not all of the member states are in conflict in one way or another .
for example and the obvious one first: The British/Irish conflict , The Balkans ( here you have a no. of small member states kicking the crap out of each, The French and just about most states .
So that means the Europe that we know is illegal.
I do have a more cynical view point on this but thats for another time.
FreeParty Posse The True sound of DANCE
29th October 2002, 23:46
Originally posted by smeggle
...The British/Irish conflict...
have i missed something? what conflict?
vBulletin® v3.8.6, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.