Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A United States of Europe

aeon.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 26 posts

Re: A United States of Europe

#11

Post by pjc50 »

inglor_cz wrote: post #8

As of now, you could probably only build a USE behind the backs of the nations involved. If referenda were held, the idea would crash and burn across most of the member states. Given that the right is poised to increase their share of power in the EP this year, it is unlikely that even a back-stage attempt is going to take place anytime soon. It was easier to build the USA on a shared platform of the same language an…

The Eurozone financial crisis and its resolutions really did a lot of damage to "we're all in it together" narratives.

Re: A United States of Europe

#12

Post by thechao »

inglor_cz wrote: post #8

As of now, you could probably only build a USE behind the backs of the nations involved. If referenda were held, the idea would crash and burn across most of the member states. Given that the right is poised to increase their share of power in the EP this year, it is unlikely that even a back-stage attempt is going to take place anytime soon. It was easier to build the USA on a shared platform of the same language an…

> same language and the same (shallow) history

Yes! Just Dutch, German, English, Spanish, Algonquin, Nahuatl, ... or, did you mean the European invaders? Native Americans had been doing their thing for a for thousands of years when the Europeans showed up. If you're talking about stuff, I don't think old buildings really means culture? The Saxons squatted in the Roman ruins, but that doesn't mean the luster of Rome wore off on them. Certainly far less than the Byzantines being the real Romans.

Also, Americans seem to have fought an awful lot of wars to build a shared polity in its "easy" process.

Re: A United States of Europe

#13

Post by philwelch »

one_more_q wrote: post #4
nairboon wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The constitution and organization of Switzerland was largely inspired by the philosophy behind the USA. Thus they are very similar in terms of the organization of the state. From this point of view, I think the fundamental flaw of the USA is the majoritarian electoral system. Majoritarian representation tends to degenerate in the long run into a gridlocked two-party system, a prime example is the USA. Thus most of th…

Agreed with this analysis. From a European who lived in the us my strong believe is that the US needs an electoral system that leads to coalitions. While far from perfect this is way better than the two party system that incentivizes the division in the public.

Proportional representation and coalition systems lead to deadlock. Belgium and Israel have gone years between stable governments because of the failure to form a coalition. Meanwhile in Germany, it’s impossible for a voter to predict ahead of time what kind of government to expect from voting for any given party because almost any party could become coalition partners with just about any other party.

The two party system is still, in effect, a coalition system; the difference is that voters know ahead of time which coalition they’re going to get.

Re: A United States of Europe

#14

Post by artoghrul »

philwelch wrote: post #13
one_more_q wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed with this analysis. From a European who lived in the us my strong believe is that the US needs an electoral system that leads to coalitions. While far from perfect this is way better than the two party system that incentivizes the division in the public.

Proportional representation and coalition systems lead to deadlock. Belgium and Israel have gone years between stable governments because of the failure to form a coalition. Meanwhile in Germany, it’s impossible for a voter to predict ahead of time what kind of government to expect from voting for any given party because almost any party could become coalition partners with just about any other party. The two party s…

The two-party system is not really a coalition system, is it? For one, there is no way for minority factions within parties to exert effective control over the other factions, no? A prime example being how the centrist majority of the Democratic party crushed the democratic socialist faction.

Re: A United States of Europe

#16

Post by pjc50 »

artoghrul wrote: post #14
philwelch wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Proportional representation and coalition systems lead to deadlock. Belgium and Israel have gone years between stable governments because of the failure to form a coalition. Meanwhile in Germany, it’s impossible for a voter to predict ahead of time what kind of government to expect from voting for any given party because almost any party could become coalition partners with just about any other party. The two party s…

The two-party system is not really a coalition system, is it? For one, there is no way for minority factions within parties to exert effective control over the other factions, no? A prime example being how the centrist majority of the Democratic party crushed the democratic socialist faction.

Conversely, the Tea Party faction of the Republicans gained control more or less entirely from the outside, due to media support.

Re: A United States of Europe

#17

Post by grotorea »

philwelch wrote: post #13
one_more_q wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed with this analysis. From a European who lived in the us my strong believe is that the US needs an electoral system that leads to coalitions. While far from perfect this is way better than the two party system that incentivizes the division in the public.

Proportional representation and coalition systems lead to deadlock. Belgium and Israel have gone years between stable governments because of the failure to form a coalition. Meanwhile in Germany, it’s impossible for a voter to predict ahead of time what kind of government to expect from voting for any given party because almost any party could become coalition partners with just about any other party. The two party s…

I don't think PR and formal coalitions have a monopoly on deadlock. The USA can have something similar whenever there's not a single party holding a trifecta, and even then between the Supreme Court and filibustering it's not really streamlined unified government.

> Meanwhile in Germany, it’s impossible for a voter to predict ahead of time what kind of government to expect from voting for any given party because almost any party could become coalition partners with just about any other party.

You have to trust that the party you're voting for will negotiate in a way that is acceptable to you. I'm not convinced that's worse than your situation in a two party system where you're guaranteed a coalition that's probably not exactly what you wanted.

Re: A United States of Europe

#18

Post by constantcrying »

Political unity has only ever been achieved at a point where the severity of outside pressures forced a group of people together.

If you look at the EU right now, it is hard to imagine a group less likely to come together. In the eyes of most member states it is still an economic union, whose purpose it is to allow international trade and allow economic benefits to the members, largely by allowing access to the enormous economies of France and Germany.

An economic union can only ever be justified in terms of utility and with the German economy not doing too great, what are the chances that the member states are willing to suffer on their behalf?

For the EU to come together it can only ever be on behalf of outside pressure, internal bureaucracies deciding so might create the legal formalities, but never something actually accepted by the population.

Re: A United States of Europe

#19

Post by linearrust »

constantcrying wrote: post #18

Political unity has only ever been achieved at a point where the severity of outside pressures forced a group of people together. If you look at the EU right now, it is hard to imagine a group less likely to come together. In the eyes of most member states it is still an economic union, whose purpose it is to allow international trade and allow economic benefits to the members, largely by allowing access to the enorm…

> Political unity has only ever been achieved at a point where the severity of outside pressures forced a group of people together.

Political unity generally comes from 'within' not from 'without'. A group of elites or an ethnic group forms the 'center' or the state and pacifies and unifies those around them. This unity is normally achieved through force. It's true throughout the world - the united kingdom, france, russia, china or the US or japan or anyone else really.

> For the EU to come together it can only ever be on behalf of outside pressure

No. Outside pressure is why many attempts at 'the united states of europe' has failed. Napoleon/france tried to create 'the united states of europe'. Britain and russia put a stop to it. Hitler/germany tried to create 'the united states of europe'. Britain/US and russia put a stop to it.

I forgot which historian said it, but he described the last 200 years of european history as 'anglo-russian meddling to prevent a franco-german unity ( aka 'the united states of europe' )'.

The problem for europe is that they have no core ( ethnic group, language, history, culture, religion, etc ) to build a united states of europe around. And that a united states of europe would be the primary threat to the united states of america/anglo world and russia. Meaning the US/britain and russia will constantly be fomenting division within europe to prevent a united states of europe.

Maybe try 'united states of germania'? 'United states of romancia'? 'United states of the baltics'? Baby steps?

Post reply on HN