|
> It is a particularly weird opinion to hold in the wake of the most recent challenge to its continuity -- the Brexit fiasco, with the EU having maintained a united front for more than 4 years, while the UK emerges out of it in a terrible state -- and the worst is yet to come. If would be a weird opinion to hold if the EU managed to keep britain. But the fact that the EU lost a major nation doesn't make it a weird opinion. It makes it a sensible one to hold. Did you think the soviet union losing warsaw pact members was also a sign of stability? > If we look at objective measures, such as economic inequality, political polarization or civil unrest, we are perhaps forced to conclude that the US are closer to collapse than the EU. No. If we lost texas or california or ny, then you might have a point. Also, none of what you listed actually lead to collapse. The US has been going strong for nearly 250 years. We survived the civil war without losing any territory or collapsing. Do you think the EU could survive the same? We have the same language, history, culture, currency, etc at this point. There is no legitimate secessionist movement here. There are a few in europe. Also, the EU has fault lines that separate people by language, history, culture, currency, etc. If economic inequality, political polarization or civil unrest lead to a collapse, then we would have collapsed a long time ago. The US survived the gilded age, civil war, the 60s, etc. The EU faced a stiff breeze and lost britain. Imagine what real issues would do to the EU? The problem with the EU is the lack of a strong central government and a sense of identity because european or eusian ( heck EU members don't really have a name do they? ) is really a meaningless designation like asian. It's too big and broad of a term to be sensible political identity. Like the soviet union. Or dare I say even the russian federation or china. |
This is very funny assuming you are from the USA. What do you call yourselves?