[saubeidl]

I don't think a mere Federalization should happen. I think a unitary state is - as you said! - what we all signed up for and what we should get.

There's a reason the "ever closer" phrasing has been repeated over and over again - in the 1983 Solemn Declaration, the 1997 Maastricht Treaty, the 2009 Lisbon treaty etc etc.

Look at China's rise and our fall - a direct consequence of centralization and the lack thereof.

[LunaSea]

> what we all signed up for

No, we didn't. The EU ignored the French and Dutch people's votes.

[saubeidl]

What are you even talking about

[hdgvhicv]

I suspect the elected French parliament ignoring the “no to eu constitution vote” in 2005

Not sure how the EU is blamed for the sovereign actions of the French Parliament.

[saubeidl]

Or how that is in any way related to the other several instances of "ever closer union" wording that France signed up to.

[LunaSea]

This is about the vote on the EU Constitution in the early 2000s during which both French and Dutch people voted against. Later the EU decided to pass it without a referendum to side step this "democracy issue". Something you would have know about if you actually understood the topic.

So no, "even closer union" is not something that most europeans want, especially not in the current climate of corruption and fuckups by the commission.

[hdgvhicv]

That’s not what happened. the French parliament ratified the treaty

Your problem is with the sovereign democratically elected parliament who ignored their own referendum.

https://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/13/scrutins/jo0083.asp

(Same in NL)

[saubeidl]

"The EU" is our elected governments, not some third-party institution. An extra vote on top of the election was always foolish.

[inglor_cz]

There is a reason indeed - unbridled utopianism that will eventually sink us.

In practice, the only political party that openly advocates for a European Federation, Volt, is polling around statistical error from zero in most EU countries. The will of the people isn't there.

Becoming a federation or even a unitary state isn't a self-executing protocol. Actual heads of governments have to meet, agree to dissolve their individual countries into a superstate with one central government, and actual parliaments have to ratify this.

You don't have the vote to do this democratically. European nationalisms were at their lowest ebb in cca 2000; since then, they have returned with vengeance.

You don't have the force to do this forcibly. No Genghis Khan or Napoleon on the scene.

And in the current connected world, you can't even do this by stealth. The only result of the people actually learning of such a plan would be far-right governments in France and Germany at the same time, ffs.

Please stop. Just stop. When I was a youngster, I witnessed violent collapse of Yugoslavia, somewhat less violent collapse of the Soviet Union and fortunately non-violent collapse of Czechoslovakia, three entities whose constituent nations didn't want to be tied together. I don't want to see 2.0 of those, continent-wide, when I am old.

"Look at China's rise and our fall - a direct consequence of centralization and the lack thereof."

Becoming more like China is not particularly attractive for former Eastern Bloc countries. Chat Control is enough of a window into such future that I don't want to go there. Also, your history is massively incomplete. Cherry-picking of some events while ignoring others.

The pinnacle of European power, with the European countries controlling half of mankind, happened around 1900, with no centralization of the continent in place. And we have been losing our relative strength since 2000, which is precisely the time when the continent is most integrated ever.

Chinese central government unleashed at least two total disasters on its own population in the 20th century - the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution. It can unleash some more if a sufficiently unhinged person gets into power again. With centralized power, you are free to make some Huge Mistakes.

I certainly don't want future Brussels to start some European versions of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, just because they can. Austria-Hungary collapsed on such stupidity after 400 years of continuing integration.

[saubeidl]

> The will of the people isn't there

The will of the people never mattered. All that matters is ideology and force to execute on it.

> Becoming more like China is not particularly attractive for former Eastern Bloc countries

Yeah, what's attractive for former Eastern Block countries is mooching off Western Europe, taking our money and then blocking any progress and electing regressive autocrats. In some ways, it was better when you were one of our (Austrian) colonies. At least we managed to drag you into modernity against your will.

> Chinese central government unleashed at least two total disasters on its own population in the 20th century - the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution. It can unleash some more if a sufficiently unhinged person gets into power again

That's the beauty of it! They did all of that and yet they are thriving now. None of this shit matters in the long term. To quote Mao - "A revolution is not a dinner party".

[inglor_cz]

"The will of the people never mattered. All that matters is ideology and force to execute on it."

OK, hence your admiration of China. Now I understand.

"Yeah, what's attractive for former Eastern Block countries is mooching off Western Europe, taking our money"

As of now, places like Germany are stagnating so much that they are called "the sick man of Europe" again, while places like Poland show enormous economic upswing. You can lie to yourself that this is caused by "taking our money", but what really kills growth in the West is bureaucracy running amok + deep anti-growth mindset of the Green part of the political spectrum. Which is negligible here, and which is both a self-inflicted wound in the West.

"and then blocking any progress"

How dare those uppity Slavs have any ideas that conflict with our better wisdom, right?

I will tell you where this sea change began: in the "wir schaffen das" autumn of 2015. That is when the eastern half of the EU found out that Western elites are suicidal or, at best, totally unrealistic, and that we cannot simply follow them into their abyss of stupidity.

Ten years later, only fanatics will call the Wilkommenskultur a success. We were right, you were wrong, and you have to live with the consequences.

"and electing regressive autocrats".

Says Austria, which elected a Nazi president (Kurt Waldheim) and introduced the FPÖ into its federal government already in the 20th century? I still remember the boycotts that resulted from that move.

"In some ways, it was better when you were one of our (Austrian) colonies."

Neither Czech lands, nor Slovenia, Galicia etc. were, in any sense, Austrian colonies. It was an amalgamation of old medieval kingdoms under one ruling house. As citizens of the old empire, we were all equal under the law - not a colonial situation where the natives are usually second-class people.

"At least we managed to drag you into modernity against your will."

Half of the people who dragged Austria-Hungary into modernity were Jewish intellectuals and businesspeople who were then massacred by German nationalists in one of the greatest crimes of history, and Austria was a massive hotbed of anti-Semitism since the era of Georg von Schönerer and Karl Lüger. Not to mention a certain unsuccessful painter on the top of it.

So thanks for precisely nothing. The worst of the rot started in Vienna, which even had the gall to call a neighboring capital "Judapest".

But you have shown your colors pretty well. Force, ideology, subjugation, agree with us or else. Fortunately modern Austria or Europe isn't really made for people like you anymore. Still a surprise to meet someone like you here on Hacker News.

[saubeidl]

> How dare those uppity Slavs have any ideas that conflict with our better wisdom, right?

I am an uppity Slav myself, brate.

> Neither Czech lands, nor Slovenia, Galicia etc. were, in any sense, Austrian colonies. It was an amalgamation of old medieval kingdoms under one ruling house. As citizens of the old empire, we were all equal under the law - not a colonial situation where the natives are usually second-class people.

Sure, just like in the Soviet Union ;)

> Half of the people who dragged Austria-Hungary into modernity were Jewish intellectuals and businesspeople who were then massacred by German nationalists in one of the greatest crimes of history.

Thank you for proving my point that nationalism is a poison to be overcome - by finally getting rid of our little tribal chiefdoms and creating a unitary state not defined by national identity.

> Force, ideology, subjugation, agree with us or else. Fortunately modern Austria or Europe isn't really made for people like you anymore. Still a surprise to meet someone like you here on Hacker News.

This is the way the world works, like it or not. The reason Europe has been doing poorly lately is because of deluded utopists thinking it isn't. It's the way the US operates. It's the way China operates. Only we in Europe think we're special little snowflakes and better than everyone else.

[inglor_cz]

Comparing Austria-Hungary to the former Soviet Union is pure lunacy. I wonder if you have been reading Mencius Moldbug too much.

"The reason Europe has been doing poorly lately is because of deluded utopists thinking it isn't. "

So you think that democracy is inherently poorer and weaker than autocracies? (Again, this sounds like Mencius Moldbug.) We have had our fair share of autocratic empires in Europe across centuries, all of them are gone. Many actually collapsed after losing a war. How so, if they are so inherently powerful?

We have different problems, such as aging of the population. But so does China, which worsened its own demographic situation by clinging to its autocratic One Child Policy until 2016, about 20 years more than it was even useful.

We also have a bureaucratic problem. Again, this is not specifically democratic disease. Every big country requires bureaucracy to run, and it can easily overwhelm the rest of the system.

[saubeidl]

I am pretty much diametrically opposed to Yarvin ideologically. I think his plans are for a dystopia.

I do think that bourgeois democracy is just a thin veil for capitalist interest and that unless the economy is democratized, nothing is.

The closest model to follow would probably be post-Stalin-Split Yugoslavia under Tito. I especially like the concepts of worker self-management, which imo is a much more meaningfully democratic system than the autocratic capitalist ownership structures of western liberalism.

[constantius]

I assume this is sarcasm, but, for those reading, a unitary state is definitely not what those words meant. If they did, that would mean that 27 countries willingly and fully signed away their sovereignty, without knowledge of the public. The only times where this has happened before in world histoey was either surrender in the face if insurmountable odds, or a decision by the elites in exchange for unimaginable riches. As far as I know, the politicians and bureaucrats who made/signed those treaties didn't become billionaires since.

[saubeidl]

This has happened many a time. The US constitution is one such example.

[constantius]

Surely you can see the huge differences between EU and US? The context and outcome of these unions are incomparable.