United States of Europe as envisioned by a Dutch beerologist

Yeah. You read right. This is for everything that doesn't have anything to do with Eva.

Moderators: Rebuild/OT Moderators, Board Staff

oOoOoOo
Nerv Scientist
Nerv Scientist
User avatar
Posts: 1677
Joined: Apr 20, 2009
Location: Canada

United States of Europe as envisioned by a Dutch beerologist

Postby oOoOoOo » Wed May 27, 2009 10:31 am

See: United States of Europe from the blog Strange Maps.

The theory behind Heineken’s idea is that a larger number of smaller member-states would be easier to govern within a single European framework than a combination of larger states competing for dominance.

Yes, that Heineken. It is a very interesting map, and makes sense to me (regardless of the nitty-gritty of the borders themselves). After all, Bavaria and Austria share a common dialect and culture, yet are in different sovereign states. By breaking everything down to smaller regions, you'd get people working together more instead of paying attention to the machinations of their respective nation states. Plus, in a potential united Europe, aren't nation states just getting in the way? How many layers of government do you need?

You could apply this concept to proposed unions in North America and East Asia, as well.

And I like maps! Pretty~ ^_^
~ O-chan is soooo 2D right now.

SaltyJoe
Nerv Scientist
Nerv Scientist
User avatar
Age: 36
Posts: 1719
Joined: Apr 23, 2009
Gender: Male

Postby SaltyJoe » Wed May 27, 2009 11:12 am

Cool. It would be like a return to the beginning of the Middle Ages, only with a democratic hub overseeing Europe as a whole.

This would make a bitchen' setting for a speculative fiction novel, or an RPG campaign.

Though, i suspect that the bureaucracy required to coordinate the countries would increase exponentially compared to the one in place in Bruxelles today.

Also, how would the European government actually work? If we were still to have a pan European body for voting, then there would be to many voters (states) to make it possible for a vote to actually happen.

If something like this would happen, i think isolationism would actually flare up between the new, smaller states. Europe's history ain't squeaky clean...

Though there are some regions who would agree with this concept (the Flemish people of Belgium would sure like the country to be abolished), and ethnic tensions would be eased at places (between the Basks and the Spanish, if the separation is done right).

But i think Mr. Heineken was probably enjoying his own product too much:).


Dartz
Eva Technician
Eva Technician
User avatar
Posts: 1487
Joined: Apr 03, 2008
Location: Dublin
Gender: Male
Contact:

Postby Dartz » Wed May 27, 2009 12:35 pm

Lol United Ireland....
-------m(^0^)m------ Wot, no sig?

NemZ
Token Misanthrope
Token Misanthrope
User avatar
Posts: 15804
Joined: Jun 28, 2008
Location: St. Louis
Gender: Male

Postby NemZ » Wed May 27, 2009 1:26 pm

I kinda wish something similar would happen in the US, specifically forcing large enough cities (and surrounding suburbs) to become city-states. Hell, every borough of NY City could qualify on it's own.

Basically I'm just damned tired of having Chicago dominate all of Illinois while simultaneously pretending the rest doesn't actually exist.
Rest In Peace ~ 1978 - 2017
"I'd consider myself a realist, alright? but in philosophical terms I'm what's called a pessimist. It means I'm bad at parties." - Rust Cohle
"Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize that half of 'em are stupider than that." - George Carlin
"The internet: It's like a training camp for never amounting to anything." - Oglaf
"I think internet message boards and the like are dangerous." - Anno

oOoOoOo
Nerv Scientist
Nerv Scientist
User avatar
Posts: 1677
Joined: Apr 20, 2009
Location: Canada

Postby oOoOoOo » Wed May 27, 2009 4:41 pm

SaltyJoe wrote:Also, how would the European government actually work? If we were still to have a pan European body for voting, then there would be to many voters (states) to make it possible for a vote to actually happen.
Population isn't an issue. India just held a general election, after all, and there is already a European parliament (elected). Since this is Europe, elections would likely be mixed-member proportional, so parties would gain seats based on vote percentage, rather than specific region. It'd work pretty much like any democracy.

If something like this would happen, i think isolationism would actually flare up between the new, smaller states. Europe's history ain't squeaky clean...
Well, both world wars were caused by imperialism and nationalism, in the era before common markets and economic interdependence. Imperialism is already dead, so removing nation-states would kill off nationalism as well. If anything, this should increase globalization, as opposed to isolationism. Globalization, after all, doesn't pay attention to borders, and tends to link cities in different countries more closely than cities and their respective rural regions within the same state. (i.e. Berlin and Paris have more in common than Berlin does with a small town in Bavaria.)

Some French thinkers brought out this idea in the 1920s (it was rejected), and was brought up again when Germany and Austria wanted to form a customs union in the Weimar period (France fucked the Austrian banks in retaliation). So, it certainly isn't a new idea. It would be nice to have a democratic superpower to complement/restrain America. Much better than a tripolar world between Russia, China, and the US, isn't it?
~ O-chan is soooo 2D right now.

NAveryW
Insect Politician
Insect Politician
User avatar
Age: 33
Posts: 5064
Joined: Dec 21, 2006

Postby NAveryW » Wed May 27, 2009 4:50 pm

Still no competition with Code Geass's United States of Japan and United States of China.
"Today?... hmm... today... right... Um... I'm just gonna wing it." -Guess who

THE Hal E. Burton 9000
Elder God
Elder God
User avatar
Posts: 5751
Joined: Feb 03, 2007

Postby THE Hal E. Burton 9000 » Wed May 27, 2009 8:51 pm

um, didn't ancient Rome, the Holy Roman Empire, and the Third Reich try to kind of do the same thing? ;)

with that being said, I wouldn't be surprised if down the road, the U.S. annexes Canada, Mexico and a good chunk of the Carribean and Central America

and a United Ireland would only happen if there really is anarchy in the U.K. (cue the song...)
- TEH Fabulous Hal E. Burton 9000

P.S. For those wanting to discuss a matter with yours truly not pertaining to the general topic at hand, PM me. Please and thank you.

Baz
Leliel
Leliel
User avatar
Posts: 715
Joined: Mar 21, 2009
Gender: Male

Postby Baz » Wed May 27, 2009 8:58 pm

THE Hal E. Burton 9000 wrote:with that being said, I wouldn't be surprised if down the road, the U.S. annexes Canada, Mexico and a good chunk of the Carribean and Central America

Let's at least see the US adopt a truly democratic federal electoral system before entertaining such crazy talk, eh?
Software Error. Press left mouse button to continue.
Guru Meditation #00000004.0000AAC0

LeoXiao
Bridge Bunny
Bridge Bunny
User avatar
Posts: 1535
Joined: Aug 25, 2008

Postby LeoXiao » Wed May 27, 2009 9:03 pm

Some of the states don't make sense. In Germany, for instance, there are already 16 perfectly good subdivisons to choose from, and he seemed to take them and cut them up just so the population thing would work out.

THE Hal E. Burton 9000
Elder God
Elder God
User avatar
Posts: 5751
Joined: Feb 03, 2007

Postby THE Hal E. Burton 9000 » Wed May 27, 2009 9:09 pm

Let's at least see the US adopt a truly democratic federal electoral system before entertaining such crazy talk, eh?
yeah, I know how crazy that is, but that was kind of "the plan" for a while among the U.S. intelligensia for generations (i.e. Texas Independence, Mexican-American War, Roosevelt Corollary, U.S.-Cuba relations from the Spanish-American War until Castro, etc.)

and not to be Debbie Downer, but I can't imagine a direct democracy at a federal level in a nation the size of the U.S., but maybe municipally and in smaller states, most in New England are rather close to it
- TEH Fabulous Hal E. Burton 9000

P.S. For those wanting to discuss a matter with yours truly not pertaining to the general topic at hand, PM me. Please and thank you.

oOoOoOo
Nerv Scientist
Nerv Scientist
User avatar
Posts: 1677
Joined: Apr 20, 2009
Location: Canada

Postby oOoOoOo » Wed May 27, 2009 9:20 pm

Baz wrote:Let's at least see the US adopt a truly democratic federal electoral system before entertaining such crazy talk, eh?
I think mixed-member proportional (MMP) representation is a pretty decent model. Germany uses it, and the Moon Nazis haven't been able to win many seats.

LeoXiao wrote:Some of the states don't make sense. In Germany, for instance....
I believe it was done along cultural lines. There are more states in Germany than there are cultural/linguistic groups, if I recall. Also, I think the idea was to make most of the regions roughly equal in population, to allow for better representation/electoral magic.

THE Hal E. Burton 9000 wrote:um, didn't ancient Rome, the Holy Roman Empire, and the Third Reich try to kind of do the same thing? ;)
I think the big thing missing was peaceful economic integration. It now makes good business sense to continue to grow closer together, because that removes barriers to ideas and money and goods and ponies. Magical ponies that I can ride to Venus. ^_^ Ahem...

Europe has been almost-pseudo-semi-unified so many times that I think they've learned their lesson. No ideology or creed. Polycultural. Money~

I wouldn't be surprised if down the road, the U.S. annexes Canada...
For all intents and purposes, the United States has already annexed us. ^_^ Our economies need each other so much, that we are one and the same. Of course, we are an extension of America, so we have to move with them. If America wanted to exert more power over us, it would not be difficult to continue along the current path and do it nice and peacefully. We used to be a client state of Britain, and now we are of America. Some might argue that all the countries in the world attach themselves to the "core" powers in their region, creating invisible empires of influence. That's how we weak countries survive. We get friendly and help out and in return get protection. We both love and hate our Onee-san. I've come to accept it. ^_^
~ O-chan is soooo 2D right now.

Evayo
Shamshel
Shamshel
User avatar
Posts: 266
Joined: Mar 15, 2009
Location: California

Postby Evayo » Wed May 27, 2009 9:25 pm

I wouldn't be surprised if down the road, the U.S. annexes Canada...

Eh? Sorry, had to do that. ^_^ But your statement about smaller countries clinging to the core holds very true.

Alaska Slim
Frigus Ignoramus
Frigus Ignoramus
User avatar
Posts: 5013
Joined: Oct 08, 2007
Location: The Land Up Over
Gender: Male

Postby Alaska Slim » Wed May 27, 2009 9:37 pm

Baz wrote:Let's at least see the US adopt a truly democratic federal electoral system before entertaining such crazy talk, eh?

What, Mob Rule? :wink:

I myself am up for becoming a one party-system, that way we can vote for people more based on their beliefs, who they are, what they've done, etc., rather than on the party line.
"Therefore encourage one another and build one another up, just as you are doing." - 1 Thessalonians 5:11

"It is one of the blessings of old friends that you can afford to be stupid with them." -Ralph Waldo Emerson

"God is in his Heaven, and free men walk upon the Earth" - Rev. Robert Sirico, President of the Acton Institute

Rommel
Ireul
Ireul
User avatar
Posts: 690
Joined: Jan 02, 2007
Location: Asuka's pants
Gender: Male
Contact:

Postby Rommel » Wed May 27, 2009 10:15 pm

Ah, no. First thing that needs to happen is term limits. The fact that there's people in congress right now who were there during Vietnam makes me rage. We also need an age limit. No more serving until you are 100 and don't even know your own name.

Then again, it comes down to the fact that voters are stupid. Ideally, we should go back to what the founding father intended and only landowners should be allowed to vote, instead of every ignorant Tom, Dick, and Harry who dropped out of highschool and can't find their own state on a map.

THE Hal E. Burton 9000
Elder God
Elder God
User avatar
Posts: 5751
Joined: Feb 03, 2007

Postby THE Hal E. Burton 9000 » Wed May 27, 2009 10:44 pm

^ :lol: :clap: sad but true
- TEH Fabulous Hal E. Burton 9000

P.S. For those wanting to discuss a matter with yours truly not pertaining to the general topic at hand, PM me. Please and thank you.

NemZ
Token Misanthrope
Token Misanthrope
User avatar
Posts: 15804
Joined: Jun 28, 2008
Location: St. Louis
Gender: Male

Postby NemZ » Wed May 27, 2009 10:51 pm

THE Hal E. Burton 9000 wrote:I wouldn't be surprised if down the road, the U.S. annexes Canada, Mexico and a good chunk of the Carribean and Central America


I'm all for it, as long as Canada and Mexico dissolve as countries and enter as individual states (along the existing subdivisions). Or the US can dissolve and join Canada, why not? The point is we don't need to add an additional level of complication to an already too complex system by creating a mini-UN or copying the EU model.

@ Rommel:

Yes to term limits.

No to landowner limitation... but maybe something more service-oriented, in a Heinleinesque fashion.
Rest In Peace ~ 1978 - 2017
"I'd consider myself a realist, alright? but in philosophical terms I'm what's called a pessimist. It means I'm bad at parties." - Rust Cohle
"Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize that half of 'em are stupider than that." - George Carlin
"The internet: It's like a training camp for never amounting to anything." - Oglaf
"I think internet message boards and the like are dangerous." - Anno

SaltyJoe
Nerv Scientist
Nerv Scientist
User avatar
Age: 36
Posts: 1719
Joined: Apr 23, 2009
Gender: Male

Postby SaltyJoe » Thu May 28, 2009 3:23 am

oOoOoOo wrote:Population isn't an issue. India just held a general election, after all, and there is already a European parliament (elected). Since this is Europe, elections would likely be mixed-member proportional, so parties would gain seats based on vote percentage, rather than specific region. It'd work pretty much like any democracy.


I wasn't addressing the issue of population regarding the election of representatives into a parliament. Rather, the voting in the parliament itself. Since Europe would be hacked up into a bunch of regions with about the same population (thus, roughly the same voting weight in the parliament), this could lead to terminal indecisivness within the Parliament. Democracies tend to be not to effective when encompassing a wide spectrum of different opinions. (Funny you should mention India. From what i heard the government is notoriously slow in that country made of countries.)


Well, both world wars were caused by imperialism and nationalism, in the era before common markets and economic interdependence. Imperialism is already dead, so removing nation-states would kill off nationalism as well.


I may have had misunderstood something in a big way, but i thought the idea proposed dividing Europe into more nation states than there are already, and having these microstates be governed by a central hub in a democratic method.

If anything, this should increase globalization, as opposed to isolationism. Globalization, after all, doesn't pay attention to borders, and tends to link cities in different countries more closely than cities and their respective rural regions within the same state. (i.e. Berlin and Paris have more in common than Berlin does with a small town in Bavaria.)


That is an interesting idea. This would also entail that none of the newly formed regions could be completely self sufficient (economically), to make them reliant on each other? Because if a region could supply itself on it's own with everything it needs, then the good old philosophy of "Why should i do anything for others?" might kick in (in fact, these kind of movements can be seen all over Europe: Germany, Austria, Belgium, Italy and Spain, where the wealthier regions would like to get rid of the less affluent ones tacked onto their backs).

About the U.S. annexing Canada: some conspiracy theorists would say that already happened (but, like, in secret).
Last edited by SaltyJoe on Thu May 28, 2009 1:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.

oOoOoOo
Nerv Scientist
Nerv Scientist
User avatar
Posts: 1677
Joined: Apr 20, 2009
Location: Canada

Postby oOoOoOo » Thu May 28, 2009 7:28 am

SaltyJoe wrote:Democracies tend to be not to effective when encompassing a wide spectrum of different opinions. (Funny you should mention India. From what i heard the government is notoriously slow in that country mad of countries.)
Oh! This is so true. ^_^ Maybe little "provinces" of ten million or so people could be easily handled by one layer, and then a Europe-wide parliament (with fewer total seats, presumably) would be another layer? Maybe being slower has its benefits, but yes, bureaucracy is a constant source of ... amusement, hehe.

I thought the idea proposed dividing Europe into more nation states than there are already, and having these microstates be governed by a central hub in a democratic method.
Ah, I think I see what you mean. If you forgive me for for being elaborate for a moment, a "nation-state" is literally one nation (ethno-cultural group) within one state (a territory completely controlled by one party through the monopoly of violence). For example, there were millions of German-speaking people in Europe who shared the same ethnic, cultural, and religious background (a nation), yet were divided amongst several fuedal kingdoms and duchies and principalities (proto-states). It was only briefly circa AD 1000 and AD 1940 that Germany was a single nation within a single state (although now the Austrians have more of a unique identity).

Thus, a hypothetical United States of Europe would be a "supranational" state, that is, beyond the nation. This wouldn't make more nation-states, but fewer, dulling nationalism. It was long a fear in Europe that the German nation would be united under one flag, as much in the days of Holy Roman Emperor Charles V as Adolf Hitler. (France, comparatively, started off as several linguistic groups, meaning Paris had to teach the French kingdom how to speak "French". Germany had a natural advantage, thus France wanted it disunited). But if all nations of Europe are united under one flag, it cannot be called a nation-state. It would be something larger, you could say. I guess you could call it a multinational state, as well.

This would also entail that none of the newly formed regions could be completely self sufficient (economically), to make them reliant on each other?
Yaya, pretty much. ^_^ It's sort of like love~ It was the reason people suggested France and Germany form an economic union in the 1920s. If the two countries had no trade barriers, things would move around naturally instead of being constrained by "national" interests. Thus, France and Germany would need each other too much to start fighting again, as they had done constantly since the fall of Rome. #_# Isn't it a tricky plan? That's one of the more constructive uses of "capitalism", and a reason I grew (somewhat) out of my "far-left" phase.
~ O-chan is soooo 2D right now.

Timstuff
Eva Technician
Eva Technician
User avatar
Posts: 1420
Joined: Jul 14, 2006
Contact:

Postby Timstuff » Thu May 28, 2009 11:38 am

The larger a government gets, the more uncomfortable I become. I myself think that our US's own federal government is overdue for some liposuction...
DeviantArt profile being re-invented... Check back later.

oOoOoOo
Nerv Scientist
Nerv Scientist
User avatar
Posts: 1677
Joined: Apr 20, 2009
Location: Canada

Postby oOoOoOo » Thu May 28, 2009 12:13 pm

Timstuff wrote:The larger a government gets...
...the larger it becomes. ^_~ Looking at history, I think you'll find the size of a government probably only determines the scale of the crimes, rather than the likelihood of crimes happening. If Hitler had only controlled Bavaria, no doubt bad things would have still happened. By controlling German, he had a greater reach.

Regardless, governments tend to do bad things, both democratic and despotic, because governments are made of people. The best we can hope for is the least horrible, no?
~ O-chan is soooo 2D right now.


Return to “Completely and Utterly Off-Topic”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests