Year 12s: what will be the first way you research your future options? >>

EU should become a superstate

The EU should become a superstate, a superpower, and commit fully to the European identity and become one country. Wages should be averaged so people get a fairer wage across the countries and investment all over Europe should happen more so that more people prosper.

If wage regulations were in place and people in poorer countries got a better deal they'd have no reason to move in the search for more money and would be content. Europe as a country would also be an enemy to be feared globally and we'd have an extremely strong military.

What I hate about the EU now is the way they've gone about their plans and rather than just giving us a say in whether we want to fully commit or not they just ignore it and pretend it isn't happening. If they fully committed to a Europe fully inclusive as a one country approach I would back it but this half arsed approach is what is killing Europe and is leading to those within Europe struggling. Its time to either fully commit to the project or disband it.

At a time when Russia is mouthing off this would be a brilliant move as the EU countries unite in solidarity under the EU flag and we should stoke up European nationalism and tell Russia where to go. We should be proud to be Europeans. We should completely embrace it.

Britain should not fear being part of the superstate and should see itself as one of the leaders alongside Germany and take a more active role. Europe united is something to be massively feared especially when the people become EU Patriots and proud to represent Europe. We'd also have one hell of an Olympics team and would compete at the top in so many sports.

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1

Chicken.M.

It would be pretty badass in a world war 3 video game scenario.

can't see it happening in real life though

Reply 2

Davij038

The official lingua Franca of the EU is English, I should add.

but broadly yes. We need a United States of Europe to secure peace, prosperity and relevance.

Reply 3

jamestg

Or not.

Different countries have different systems, cultures, monetary value. One size does not fit all.

What you have proposed is ludicrous and extremely ill-informed.

Yes there are benefits, but it is overwhelming negative overall.

Reply 4

Baby Milo

Original post by Davij038

The official lingua Franca of the EU is English, I should add.

but broadly yes. We need a United States of Europe to secure peace, prosperity and relevance.

You missed the important part, 'and to destroy Russia'.

Reply 5

Chicken.M.

It's been like this throughout history.

E.g. Mongolia were a bunch of scattered tribes. They united and rekt all of Asia.

Europe could do the same but it probably won't happen unless another world war breaks out

Reply 6

Baby Milo

Original post by jamestg

Yes there are benefits, but it is overwhelming negative overall.

Based on what? It hasn't been tried and tested so how the hell can you suggest 'it is' overwhelmingly negative overall? Hilarious. Europe would be a superpower. The UK at the moment is essentially a non country. Countries barely even respect the UK.

Reply 7

Davij038

Original post by Baby Milo

You missed the important part, 'and to destroy Russia'.

You mean integrate it surely :wink:

Reply 8

Evening

Would never work in practise unless there was a war. Too many ethnic differences/flow of immigration would displace millions.

Reply 9

Baby Milo

Original post by Davij038

You mean integrate it surely :wink:

Once we claim the Kremlin as ours :colone:

Seriously though, if Europe become a superstate Putin would not be pulling this crap. He's doing it because independent countries making up a political entity (the EU) are vulnerable - like weak links in a chain. If we become one superstate then we become a strongly bound rope. Putin would not try any of this nonsense. He's only doing now to stop the superstate forming.

Reply 10

anunoriginaluser

I've wanted this for a while :c

The issue is we have too many patriots who just blindly go "herp england best country uk is like global suparp0wer we dont need europe" and are utterly blinded by our history of being an empire.

I think some states would be more receptive and some less; from what I understand and have seen Germany is pretty pro-EU, so I'd imagine they'd probably be the driving force between it if it ever happened?

(edited 9 years ago)

Reply 11

Baby Milo

Original post by Evening

Would never work in practise unless there was a war. Too many ethnic differences/flow of immigration would displace millions.

The war will be with Russia. The European Superstate will form as part of propaganda and EU nationalism will rise as our existence comes under threat from Russia. We'll come together as patriotic Europeans and make Putin our bitch.

Reply 12

william walker

The Americans wouldn't allow it to happen even if it could. Such things like the EU super state are reached through a sea of blood, so do you want that?

Reply 13

Chicken.M.

Original post by Baby Milo

Europe best country world

Reply 14

william walker

Original post by Baby Milo

George Friedman has a now book out.

Reply 15

Baby Milo

Original post by william walker

The Americans wouldn't allow it to happen even if it could. Such things like the EU super state are reached through a sea of blood, so do you want that?

prove the sea of blood claim.

Reply 16

Josb

So charismatic. He and the other European leaders in Brussels will lead us to world domination! :colone:

Herman-van-Rompuy_2592405b.jpg39.7KB

Reply 17

william walker

Original post by Baby Milo

prove the sea of blood claim.

Some people want nation states other people want a super state. The people who want the nation state are willing to die to keep it, are the super state people?

Reply 18

jamestg

Original post by Baby Milo

You don't become a superpower by pooling countries together :biggrin:

.

Countries in the EU have completely different economic systems, combining them would cause instability and people trading wouldn't be confident investing in this new country.

Countries would not get an equal say in what will happen to them. Think of how many people are in power in these countries, thousands! How are thousands of politicians with different beliefs going to agree on something that is universal?! You can't simply create a new government based only on 'higher politicians'. It's basically a political cull.

How expensive will it be for countries with worse infrastructure going to cope? By sending UK taxpayers' money to a foreign country and not actually affecting them! It would be extremely expensive to standardise infrastructure.

People have different wealths in countries. Take a family from Bulgaria and one from the UK. They earn the same amount - however the value of money is different. You would need multiple taxation systems within this big branch which is inefficient and you're essentially keeping things the same. What a waste of money!

Millions could lose jobs as the value of money is brought to a standard amount. More industries will move out because it will become too expensive and will then go to LEDCs.

It will cause complete unrest and instability, in multiple ways.

Here's an analogy. Take 5 completely different sized men and one size of jeans. They won't all fit into what's given to them.

Reply 19

Baby Milo

Original post by william walker

Some people want nation states other people want a super state. The people who want the nation state are willing to die to keep it, are the super state people?