Dieser Bereich kann Inhalte enthalten, die nicht für alle Nutzer geeignet sind. Dazu können unter anderem Texte, Medien oder Diskussionen gehören, die als beleidigend, extremistisch, gewaltbezogen oder anderweitig belastend empfunden werden. Wenn du solche Inhalte nicht sehen möchtest, nutze bitte die jeweiligen Filter- und Meldeoptionen der Plattform oder meide entsprechende Threads/Communities.
I was referring to the articles of confederation, not the Confederacy, and how short lived it was was my point.
The EU as a governing body and not just a trade group really isn’t that old yet.
The needs of a modern global economy are completely different, though.
That said, I’m happy to just say we agree to disagree on whether this is broadly true or not.
I would like a response to my specific points though about trouble the EU is running into and how up fix those problems if not more federal power to the EU? How do you stop EU companies from jumping ship to the US for their large single investment market without a competing consolidated European one? How do we mount our own effective defense force without a central power to manage it?
This can still happen (and historically, as the birthplace of fascismhas, has happened) in European nations within said nations, though. That’s nothing inherent to any political system.
The breakdown of the US political landscape seemingly doesn’t have a lot to do with their version of federalism; most of Europe has far more explicitly central national governments and this hasn’t happened (lately). That kind of abuse of power can happen under literally any system from fascist to socialist.
I would first like to have some solid evidence that these are caused by the confederal structure of the EU, and that they would be indeed solved by moving to a federal system. So far that seems to me like pure conjecture and also a huge gamble that could destroy the EU in the process.
In a centralized state, yes. But that is exactly what a confederacy isn’t. And the concrete example is that people in other states voted for Trump and thus directly interefered with the affairs of a state that didn’t. That isn’t at all comparable to a state internal problem.
I mean, they are self evident, no? A balkanized investment market exists because there’s no single structure to manage one large one. There’s no single EU military. No?
I can’t be arsed to give any other than logical arguments such as the above. That’s why I said I’m happy to leave this as an ‘agree to disagree’ moment, because that’s really hard to prove one way or the other, and I consider this casual conversation not debate. So I’m happy to just say we have different perspectives here and call it a day. I’ve cited a few examples, as have you, I don’t think either position is stupid or poorly thought out, I just disagree with your conclusion.
Isn’t this just libertarianism?
You’ll have to explain to me how. Whether you “zoom in” or “zoom out” the principle is the same, as far as I can tell.