As we can see, having open borders without common security/intelligence and immigration/foreign policy is RETARDED, and current EU is going to shit.
For that reason i propose creating Federation within the EU. Participation would be non-mandatory. The Federation would be very loose and decentralized and would have united security and foreign policy. Head of the government would be directly elected president of the Union, and the legislature would have two houses modeled after the USA (number of representatives in lower house would be proportional to the number od citizens in each country, and in upper house each country would have equal number of representatives.)
Do we have any other alternative other than disunity and disintegration into disconnected nation states?
Discuss!
>inb4 muh heritage! >inb4 muh patriotism! >inb4 My country X does not have anything in common with country Y Do you have more in common with white europeans or 3rd generation of unintegrated somalis and nigerians?
No, but we should create a Central and East European Federation.
Brody Phillips
Well, we could have Central, East, West, South etc... federations within EU i guess.
Kayden Garcia
>Do we need Federal Europe? No >As we can see, having open borders without common security/intelligence and immigration/foreign policy is RETARDED, and current EU is going to shit. Exactly >For that reason i propose creating Federation within the EU. Participation would be non-mandatory Any form of EU would be mandatory, don't be fooled, the EU is a tyranny. >united security and foreign policy I wouldn't agree on security, our army is to protect ourselves and our interests, we just cannot defend everyone. Same for the foreign policies, all countries have different interests, it just wouldn't work. > Head of the government would be directly elected president of the Union Again, no. I could only accept a leader of France to rule myself, and I believe the same goes for other countries. >Do we have any other alternative other than disunity and disintegration into disconnected nation states? Yes, nations states that have been going on for centuries and relations between each other, as it has always been. We can see that anything other than this doesn't work.
>Do you have more in common with white europeans or 3rd generation of unintegrated somalis and nigerians? I don't have much in common with any, I feel french way before feeling european, if I'm told "look, it's your italian brother" or spanish or belgian or whatever, why not, but it's just foolish to believe we europeans are all brother countries, we have some in common with the neighbouring countries but that's all, with all the respect and apreciation I have for the balts for example, I just don't feel close to them, and any form of EU would try to tell me that they are just like us. Every country in Europe has its own identity, that's what makes the continent so original and attractive, if we all merge together, our identities will be gone, and all we'll have left will be a handmade "identity".
Adrian Price
>our army is to protect ourselves and our interests
That's why you needed alliances to save your ass in wars?
Don't fool yourself, in the modern world no country can protect themselves.
>I could only accept a leader of France to rule myself
Hence why it should be a federation and not a unitary state.
>nations states that have been going on for centuries
Not true. nations states are a 19th century invention
Joshua Edwards
>Do we need Federal Europe? No
>As we can see, having open borders without common security/intelligence and immigration/foreign policy is RETARDED, and current EU is going to shit. So we should have a federal EU with no interests in keeping those borders shut, rather than nations governing their own borders according to their own interests? If the Germans want to commit demographic suicide that's their prerogative, but their neighbors shouldn't suffer with them.
>Do we have any other alternative other than disunity and disintegration into disconnected nation states? What's so bad about the alternative
>inb4 muh heritage! >inb4 muh patriotism! >inb4 My country X does not have anything in common with country Y Yeah, inb4 literally all the things the unity of a nation depends on.
>Do you have more in common with white europeans or 3rd generation of unintegrated somalis and nigerians? Are somalians and nigerians trying to join some kind of union with the Netherlands or something? I don't see how this question is relevant.
Owen Cox
Why do you need Holland? Why not let each city govern themselves?
Robert Clark
Because all Dutchmen speak the same language, have been united under one flag in one form or another since the 1400s and have spent centuries developing an identity they have together. At this point breaking up the Netherlands would be as forced and arbitrary as forcing it into a union with 28 other countries it only shares its geographical location with.
Zachary Lewis
loving it
Luis Mitchell
I'm priud of our flag, our architecture, our king and our people. It's not that we are better than anybody else, but it just makes this continent more interesting. On holiday I could discuss about several things of our countries with foreigners. That would be a bit more boring when everybody lives in the same one.
Jason Reyes
>I'm proud >of our king Nigger please
Matthew Roberts
EUROPE help !!!!!! The right wing is bullying us again ;_;
Jason Jackson
>Do we need Federal Europe? Obviously yes. But no Merkel/Junkers/Holland to lead it. Please no.
Asher Perry
Would you rather want to be ruled by a nigger president? No black people could replace him. And I like him actually more than the "Belgian" king
Camden Bennett
Pic related would be an EU I'd like to be part of.
James Scott
>Would you rather want to be ruled by a nigger president? Why does he automatically have to be a nigger? And yeah, if he's talented enough I'd prefer a black president over a white king who does nothing but soak up tax money. I'm one of those retards who wants leaders to be selected on merit.
Juan Campbell
I don't like the EU all that much, but I have to admit that checking where my new Euro coins are from is pretty neat.
Ryan Reed
>That's why you needed alliances to save your ass in wars? >Hurr durr WW2 I'm talking about our current army, don't play the stupid >Not true. nations states are a 19th century invention No, the idea of France and french people has been going on for a while.
Jace Gomez
You mean the 4th Reich? Fuck no. I had a sliver of hope that the EU would reform after the brexit but nope, can't do that with retards like Merkel and Hollande in charge. So the EU's basically fucked at this point, it's going to dissolve in the next decade or so.
Gavin Young
How about WW1? Or did you beat the germans without help then? How about you would have been a communist soviet and lost your independence without the americans staying in Europe after WW2.
Your current army can defend itself for a while but can't win a war against the americans, russians, chinese.
No, the french people and nation has existed for a while, the nation state of France is more recent.
Why do you think we can't do those things in a Federal Europe? Sure, it would take time to create an European identity but it took time to create a duch one too.
Jack Long
>How about WW1? Or did you beat the germans without help then? The germans weren't fighting alone either, it was a war of coalition. But that's not the subject, we're talking about today. >Your current army can defend itself for a while but can't win a war against the americans, russians, chinese. And good new, these countries are our friends and we wouldn't go to war against them. >No, the french people and nation has existed for a while, the nation state of France is more recent. You can trace it to a long time ago back during the monarchy, when our kings stopped being "king of the salian franks" and became the king of France and of the french.
Ryder Gutierrez
>How about WW1? How about you go fuck yourself. A group of nations banding together in their common interest has been happening since literally the beginning of civilization. It is NOT the same as that group of nations becoming one nation.
>Your current army can defend itself for a while but can't win a war against the americans, russians, chinese. As a matter of fact, it can. The French nation has the privilege of its own Samson-option.
>Sure, it would take time to create an European identity but it took time to create a duch one too Yeah, centuries. I don't know about you, but I can't afford to wait centuries. And the only other alternative is that the Germans simply start invading and start banning the Dutch language and enforcing German through the education system and high-placed jobs. But of course you don't want that because muh EU is about muh peace and muh prosperity.
On the western front they where. I'm not sure how much help the Austrians give them since they had their own troubles in the Balkans.
>russia and china are our friends
Are you sure about that? And do you think the americans care about France or are they following their own interests?
The french kingdom is not the same as the french nation state. By that definition Romania is almost 700 years old.
How about no. A group of nations will follow their own interest even if that interest is not the same as their allies. Also it's very unproductive because it takes time. In the modern world you don't have that time.
>Samson-option
I'm sure the French will start launching nukes if they are invaded.
Also, like I said in the beginning I don't want a federal europe with you or france. Just Central and Eastern Europe.
>centuries
No, it would be much faster because of modern technology and free movement of people.
