Tweet
As Euro-zone nations continue to struggle with a currency union that isn’t working, it looks like the European Union is either going to be forced to break up the currency union or head towards greater political integration. If one looks at the United States of America’s own history, though, the prospects of a United States of Europe appear dim at best.
Even though the 13 states were originally semi-autonomous colonies before the Revolutionary War, they were sharing some aspects of a single country. Most had a shared common language and most shared a common legal tradition. There was also a relatively high level of mobility between the colonies and a relatively similar national culture. The relatively young age of the colonies meant there were no century-old grievances between them. The revolutionary war also gave Americans some unifying national heroes like George Washington.
Yet despite the fact all these factors made the American states good candidates for political integration in a single federal system, the process for getting there was incredibly rocky. Regional economic differences were a serious problem. For the first several decades the country faced multiple potential threats of disintegration, with the most notable resulting in the Civil War. This was one of the bloodiest wars in history, a conflict that practically wiped out a whole generation of males.
Even with many factors going for it, the process of national unification, moving from “These United States” to “The United States,” was not smooth. It was at times devastating, horrible and come close to failing.
Looking at Europe, it is hard for me to see how the true political integration of multiple countries with different languages, cultures, national identities and legal traditions could possibly go more smoothly than our experience. It will be a radically tougher task than the 13 colonies faced.
Currently the United States of America functions as a single country, under a federal framework, so I can understand why a United States of Europe may seem to some like a nice ideal. But it took us a long time to get here. If Europeans want to become their own united states, they have to decide if it is worth going through what could easily be generations of horrible growing pains, and it has to be more than just so you can use the same coins in France that you do in Finland.
16 Comments
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL Action
Federated States? Sovereign Nations? How 20th Century! We are all headed towards being associates of (name your country) a subsidiary of (Name your multi-national corporation).
Then it will be which of them will start maintaining their own private armies to ensure their profits. Contracts and treaties will only be for those with the muscle to enforce them.
There is one major difficulty with your distopian vision. Nation states will still be needed to issue currency and to referee contract disputes. Armies and conflicts are incredibly bad for business and trade. But going back to the topic, it does seem that the European Union concept is premature and likely to fail at this time.
Have you gotten ahold of Neal Stephenson’s “Snow Crash” ?? His novel takes place in some indeterminate future (book was written in 1992) where people live in Storage Units and are glad to have the space to do that.
From Wikipedia: “Set in Los Angeles, most references are consistent with a date in the early 21st century. In this hypothetical reality, the federal government of the United States has ceded most of its power to private organizations and entrepreneurs.[3] Franchising, individual sovereignty and private vehicles reign (along with drug trafficking, violent crime, and traffic congestion). Mercenary armies compete for national defense contracts while private security guards preserve the peace in gated, sovereign housing developments. Highway companies compete to attract drivers to their roads rather than the competitors’, and all mail delivery is by hired courier. The remnants of government maintain authority only in isolated compounds where they transact tedious make-work that is, by and large, irrelevant to the dynamic society around them.
Much of the territory ceded by the government has been carved up into sovereign enclaves, each run by its own big business franchise (such as “Mr. Lee’s Greater Hong Kong”) or the various residential burbclaves (suburban enclaves).”
the book is a tremendously insightful (and Fun) read and really understands what Globalization has wrought.
One could question whether it in fact, did work out (for the overwhelming majority of its citizens).
Have not read the book. But will now have to head to the local library to check it out. Thanks.
That is a great book, a sort of libertarian contract based society.
Re the post, I like this analysis. The nations of Europe are really different in culture, language and national goals, and it may take some time for the ancient grudges to wear off. Remember, the state of Italy was not finalized until the late 1800s, and there are massive cultural differences among Italians even today.
Hahahahahahahahaha. Ha!
The English & French have only fought for about 1,000 years. Has not worn off yet.
One need to reflect on how well the United Stats is working today, its prospects and the superb, effective and honest representation of us in DC, by our elected Representatives, and Senators.
And consider Citizens United.
Europe wants to or should replicate this?
I hereby award thee style-points for referencing one of the coolest sci-fi books ever. My wife handed me that book in a bookstore years ago. I skimmed the first few pages. “Hiro Protagonist? What kind of story is this?”
A really good one.
totally agree, an excellent analysis indeed
australia, too shared cultural, including religious and linguistic, homogeneity, if we ignore indigenous peoples, yet it wasn’t until 1901 that a united federation could be established and this despite a common currency since captain phillip raised the union jack in botany bay- new zealand opted out of the union
interstate rivalry continues today which was a surprise to me when i came here as an immigrant in 1983 with each state proclaiming their uniqueness that wasn’t evident to me then
As far as contract disputes go, there already are global treaties, Nafta and the still-in-the-works Trans Pacific Partnership, which require disputes over trade agreements to be litigated in special, non-national courts.
And those courts apparently have the right to overrule a nation’s own laws governing environmental regulation or labor rights.
And, might now be on it’s way out, too.
Too late, I’m a-feared.
Shotgun weddings- what could go wrong?
Ah, the Torygraph — the prime respectable promoter of Little (i.e., Caucasian) England. (The prime promoter is of course the Forger’s Gazette, aka the Daily Hate Mail, which backed Hitler and whose owners and operators are unreconstructed fascists to this day.)
The mid-20th-century European powers didn’t need the CIA to sell them on Federalism. They’d just been through two devastating wars, wars that sucked in every major military and industrial power on the globe, and they’d frankly had enough of wars on their own turf. There was a strong desire to find ways to avoid wars in the future, and unification was seen as an effective path towards that goal.
We would have been better off with the Queen. We lost the Revolution and now are part of the United Plantations of America.