The United States of Europe

[Leoreth]

Okay, maybe we could get on the same page if you said which responsibilities you would transfer to the confederation's central government.

 

[Benefactor]

The Parliament isn't that weak since the Lisbon Treaty took effect.

 

[Leoreth]

Still weaker than the Commission or Council while it should be the other way around.

 

[JohannaK]

I am with gangleri here, as long as Spain lets Catalonia be independent.
If not, I want a united country, so at least it won't be Spain oppressing us And Europe will be very powerful.

 

[muhtesem insan]

But at least - excepting the unlawful Turkish occupation of parts of the island, of course - Cyprus is dominated by Greek culture.

And how different do you think Turkish and Greek Cultures are?

 

[IdiotsOpposite]

And how different do you think Turkish and Greek Cultures are?

I don't know what he's going to say, but I for one am interested in what you think they are. As a neophyte to Eastern European relations, I don't know much about it myself and would be interested to hear the opinions of a man of Turkey on that question.

 

[Traitorfish]

Not really, geographical Europe is pretty well define.. if you ignore Turkey and the exact border in the east.

Not really. There is a very broad post-'91 convention, but that's neither particular objective nor, as your own qualifications prove, particularly precise. Definitions can and do range from Catholic-Protestant Europe alone, to including Israel, Armenia and Morocco, which is a margin of error of something like 100%. And that's basically a bit crap.

 

[Quackers]

Ignoring Turkey and fudging the Eastern border isn't "pretty well define[d]". It is spectaculaly undefined

 

[JohannaK]

I define Europe as the land on the Eurasian tectonic plate West of the Ural mountains and river and on the northern side of the Caucasus. That is, the piece of land connected by land with Asia by the Caucasus and Ural mountains and river. And, of course, any islands on the same tectonic plate.

 

[Leoreth]

Whatever is going on on the eastern edge of Europe, it's ridiculous to imply that Britain's not part of the continent.

 

[JohannaK]

Completely. But politically, they'd rather be alone in the middle of the Atlantic (like geographic Iceland). Or so it seems.

 

[Agarwaen]

I think European Union has a precise design in that mess of institutions. It is democratic enought to institutionalise some conflicts, but undemocratic enought so the will of the states trumps over the will of people. And the central government is strong enought to impose itself over small and weak governments, but weak enought so not to rule over the big dogs.

 

[Veles]

If we're talking about ideal Europe here, then I think its geographical definition should be expanded and Latin should be made universal language as a powerful culture-binding force.

Russia should definitely be a part of European State. Yes, it would constituate 20% of its population and 2/3 of its territory, so what? It took Slavs millenia of blood and sweat to conquer the forest and the steppe for European civilization (of which they are the biggest part) colonise it and make it suitable for living, so it's well deserved.

The thing is to change the mechanisms of representation (and abolish autocratic institutions) so that no nation or culture could dominate. The entirety of Europe from Lisbon to Vladivostok should be divided into several hundreds (thousands?) entities of more or less comparable size. This entities would be the basiс element of European structure, kinda like modern municipalities, but significantly more powerful and self-sufficient. All the fiscal, judical, police and other basic functions will be performed on that level, within the minimal framework, set at federal (confederate?) level.

It will elect councils (soviets? ), say 110 MPs for each 100000 of population. Those elected will then elect among themselves, say 10 MPs for each 100000 of population for a next level parlament, who would represent a region. With the same manner of election, the next level parliament would be of roughly what now constituates a country. In case of Russia there should be several such parliaments. The final level would be All-Europe council, significantly less powerful, as all actual govering would occur on municipal level.

Some soverignty should be given up, sure, but hey, if Russia itself does it, why shouldn't others follow? It's for the common good, after all.

Since everybody seems to be so sensitive about culture, Latin language would ensure that no single culture dominates. Every European nation can relate to Latin in some way. Less so for East Slavs, but here that little fact many come handy, that Proto-Balto-Slavic comes from the same language continuum with Latin, and to this day has many similiar words and constructions.

 

[Traitorfish]

Isn't it begging the question to argue for a definition of Europe in reference to "European civilisation"?

 

[Veles]

Perhaps, if you're willing to. What is your definition?

I'd say Indo-European, Christian background, within the geographical definition of Europe (which poses another question ).

All very subjective, yes.

 

[warpus]

I'd say Indo-European, Christian background, within the geographical definition of Europe (which poses another question ).

All very subjective, yes.

That would exclude Albania, parts of Spain, France, Germany and Sweden, Hungary, and Finland.

 

[Veles]

Well, that was predictable. Again, the nature of question is very subjective.

Long story short - they're in. 'Nuff said.

 

[Traitorfish]

Well, no, not really. If your basis for inclusion is simply whether Veles thinks a given region is European, then why should anybody else feel obliged to pay it any heed whatsoever? They can just as easily say "Actually, no, I think that it should be X Y Z".

 

[Veles]

Well, no, not really ...If your basis for inclusion is simply whether Veles thinks a given region is European...

No? Darn. At least it was a nice try, though, hopefully

What's your definition, anyway?

If you want an exact universal formula of Europeanness, than most probaly there's none, and decisions should be taken for every region individually. But anyway, those should definately be among the factors considered: Indo-European, Christian background, within the geographical definition of Europe. Spiced by some common sense.

 

[Traitorfish]

Honestly? I tend to think of "European" as an historical fiction. It can be a useful term in particular contexts, but only to a certain extent, and it's shifting and even self-contradictory even then. I didn't really see any coherent grounds for establishing any sort of general European identity.

I still don't know why an Indo-European language is important, though. It seems to me that most Europeans just happen to speak one, rather than it having any particular significant in and of itself. A Castilian is in every significant respect more similar to a Basque than he is to a Dutchman, regardless of the genealogy of their native tongue. It seems like you're mistaking a vague correlation for a causal relationship (in whatever direction).