Originally Posted by
Sue Vêtements
I never really understood this point of view. We were the third largest block so were very influential inside the EU. In fact We voted For 95% of the time, Abstained 3% of the time and only voted Against a mere 2% of the time
Also when the balloon does go up, who do people generally call for? The Americans. Could that possibly because they're stronger? and if so, could that be because they're a collection of fifty sovereign entities united under one federal umbrella? ...and had they not joined together, would there even still be an America, or would it have been a continual inter-state conflict? and if THAT had happened, what would WWII have looked like?
You're way over simplifying by comparison of the EU with the USA. The former is, as you seem to admit, in the early stages of trying to transform all member states into becoming non national entities individually, but component parts of a single one. That is going to be a harder process for some because there are still clear national differences. The USA was never made up of former nation states but were a series of European colonial settlements. The formation of what became the USA arose from the collective objections from the colonies to British oversight and taxation. They wanted a say in the setting of the tax levies. The 13 colonies until the declaration of independence in 1776 were neither a single nation nor a collection of nations. The development of the circumstances since has been an entirely different route historically to that of the different EU "countries" they were welded into a single nation against a common foe, us. Arguably some countries in the EU can claim their national origins go back more than 2,000 years. Some less than 200, but they all have clearly defined national characteristics, down to attitudes and behaviour, its not popular to point it out, but it does explain the clear differences in economic management by say, Greece and Germany.
FB