Which is why the EU is not only good, but needed - as I said before, a bunch of small and weak states can't resist the economic pressure, but a unified EU could enforce such a thing, or at least survive it.
Which is why in most or every rant of mine against the EU - you may have suffered one - I did note that in principle the EU could be the strongest weapon Europeans have to combat the ills of the loss of national power.
But I devoted those rants to how the EU does the opposite. My rule of thumb is simple: To go against the interests of capitalists is hard - so you need a keen responsive public to make the political elite do so nevertheless. There is no European public. Hence - the EU won't do so. Now - after it has become clear beyond doubt that there is a real and strong existential threat to the EU - politicians speak about how the EU also needs to take on social matters. Meaning (while being a bit dramatic to highlight the point): How the EU needs to care about the actual people rather than money. But what will come of it? Nothing in sight yet. Nothing to anticipate, even.
The EU defended its free-trade deals with the US and Canada with handling the loss of national power. With shaping globalization rather than merely caving to it. A potential alternative to protectionism and giving up. But what did this actually mean? Technicalities and some consumer protection. The social angel? Forget it. Hearing the voice of non-profit-organizations? They were not even allowed to know anything about the negotiations. Nor were most of the national parliaments which are at least more responsive to the populace.
I do not doubt that some EU negotiators did some good work to push through European standards. And that this may have meant something good. But overall, it is not even clear weather the free-trade-agreements create any jobs in Europe (because the US got lower social standards), while pro-big-business-orgs are found to flound inflated numbers. Because for big business those agreements are gold. Big business is already international, so anything making that easier is profitable. But as the head of the German institution for economic research, Marcel Fratzscher, recently pointed out, the slogan that what is good for the companies is good for the people holds much less true than it used to. And that is hardly a lefty, but a pro-free-trade-deal guy. Because basically, he can not think of anything else.
But in the end - you may be right. The EU may be our best chance to get anything good done. But the EU is also more a symptom of the times than its cure. And more representative of its ills than a measure to change course.
I said it before and I say it again - there is no functional democracy without a functional public discourse of policy. And while many nations have something or a lot of something to be desired in that area, a European public discourse is
NON-EXISTENT.
Though I say all that not even talking about the Euro, another idea initiated by the 10 largest European companies in their neat European lobbying groups. And an idea which even very conservative economists will find easy to attack.
But hey, it got Germany essentially protectionism through the back-door. By devaluing our currency without anyone objecting to it. Because it got adapted to the economies of other, more southern, nations. China also devalues, and Trump whines about it. Not so with Germany.
