Welcome to our second-ever book of the month! Each month, we put forward a book for our Book Club, collecting your questions and comments and taking them to the author for their response. In May, it is the turn of Professor Ulrike Guérot and her book “Why Europe Must Become a Republic“.
Ulrike Guérot is the founder of the European Democracy Lab, and we asked you to send us in questions for her back in March. The central thesis of her book is that “reform” and tinkering around the edges of the EU is no longer sufficient. Instead, she believes we need a fresh start with a new, more democratic blueprint.
The new “European republic” would comprise of:
- Civil equality before the law
- Political equality in the form of universal suffrage
- Shared mechanisms to promote the common good
What do our readers think? We had a comment sent in by Klaus, who is convinced of the benefits of European federalism, because he thinks individual European nationstates cannot stand alone against “global players” such as the US and Russia. Would Ulrike Guérot agree? Is this also part of the motivation for writing her book?
I deliberately chose the term ‘republic’ because it carries very different connotations than ‘federation’. For 70 years we have been discussing European integration through the lens of federalism, even though the word ‘federation’ has different meanings in different European languages. In France, for example, we mean ‘centralisation’, in Germany, on the other hand, we mean the federation [of government] downwards, in terms of countries and municipalities, etc.
At heart, it’s probably the same concept, but according to my way of thinking we’re talking about a republic. I mean that in the sense of the ‘res publica’ and the common good, with the citizens as sovereign within the political system. This is certainly a different motivation than starting a federation of nation-states because one feels they are too small to compete on the world stage. Because the concept of the republic is aimed at the citizen. As Jean Monnet once said: ‘Europe does not mean to integrate states, but to unite citizens’.
Next up, we had a comment from @Me2birdie sent to us via Twitter, asking what happens if the majority of Hungarians or Danes simply do not want to be part of a European Republic. Will these countries be thrown out of the EU?
Neither of them! In the end, neither the EU nor the nation state can decide, only the sovereign citizens can make this kind of political decision. Following this line of thinking, it is no longer about ‘the Hungarians’, but about all of us as 510 million European citizens, who together decide whether we want a European democracy (republic) based on the general political principle of equality. Then together we say ‘yes’ or ‘no’ to the EU.
Finally, we had a comment from Robin, who wanted to know whether the idea of a European Republic is really a realistic prospect. Are we getting closer to achieving it, or is the idea further away than ever?
As Stefan Zweig would have argued: we cannot understand the historical epoch we live in, because the final outcome of our era is still open. We know very clearly today that the Weimar epoch was 1918-1933. Today, however, we only know that everything started with the Maastricht Treaty in 1992; when or how this epoch ends, we do not know yet. Nations are divided over the European question. I think it’s really taken off … maybe it’s because of my own bubble of perception, but there has never been so much discussion about Europe. Never before has there been so much civil society engagement … [Look at] Debating Europe! We are talking about Europe with the help of the latest technology!
People are really talking and asking questions about Europe, and that has changed, even if we do not always have the answers. Incidentally, that also means the ‘opposite side’ [e.g. nationalism, euroscepticism] is also being discussed more, and there is disagreement, and that is good. Because we argue and disagree, but it has little to do with your nationality. Your political position is more and more determined by your age or place of residence. I think these new discourses coming from young people are great! It is more and more about European democracy, rather than European integration. That’s a good paradigm shift. We have to win this discussion, which certainly will not be a cakewalk, but we can all do our part!
Would you like the EU to become a ‘European Republic’? Should citizens, rather than nationstates, be the political foundation of the EU? Is this a realistic prospect, or just a pipedream? Let us know your thoughts and comments in the form below and we’ll take them to policymakers and experts for their reactions!
298 comments Post a commentcomment
A European banana republic is what you already have.
Europe only produces a single cash crop? Because that is what the phrase refers to.
Maarten Dominicus Schroders It also refers to any State that is politically unstable or tyrannical.
Aren’t you leaving?
Why are u still here?
I would, a European federation is the best way to make sure European interests are protected without becomming vasal states to the US or getting the continent devided again
What would you do if the peoples in the EU said no ?
Then its no. Simple. As a EU citizen i woudnt mind if the EU became a country
The EU is already a federation.
It’s not, it’s a polittical union between 28, soon to be 27 countries who decided a higher government would be benificial.
Mario Tuhcic Only in the dreams of EU fanatics, the majority have never wanted your pointless EU and will never accept it.
Ivan “fanatics” “never”(2x) “pointless”: that’s fanatics language. To Mario, it’s not a federation yet, although several fields of sovereignty have already been delegated to the EU.
Marnix Kappeyne I don’t remember being asked,I do remember having to vote 4 times on 2 EU treaties because we gave the wrong answer..
Oreste Kafaf by whom? Our sovereignty is not for politicians to give away
I meant for it to go to Mario sorry for not clarifying that in the comment :)
The irony here is that by giving up your right as an individual country working together with others, and instead becoming a part a centralized government entrusting people far from your country to handle and treat your country and your laws the way they see fit, is the very definition of becoming a vassal.
Should the day come when countries existing for hundreds, some even a thousand year cease to exist because of power hungry marxists, I’m leaving the EU to any other country where the people have control over their own country and can choose their own leaders. That is a democractic republic. Nobody elected the people from my country who are holding my country under serious political and economic pressure because we – Hungary – oppose their politics and refuse to have their views forced upon us, and in response all we get is hate and threats, trying to silence us and take away our right to vote. That’s what the current EU leadership is like who THINK they have the right to govern everything. Be sure people who love their country will oppose every way possible actually giving them real rights to do that.
What is with the invasion of BRITS here telling us what to do ??
Don’t you brexitards have a country to sink? Chop chop.
I definitely support the idea of unity! United we can achieve much more, separate we can fail easily. However, we do need a constitution which allows the union to supervise the member states, fiscal, military and legal movements to prevent the occurrence of such dictator candidates as Mr.Orbán of Hungary !
European Peoples Republic ;)
Communism is always the answer
Only if death, decay and misery on a biblical scale is the required outcome.
Yes.
What to do with all the monarchs ?
Bye bye monarchs!
Id prefer to keep them. How about instead of figure head of the country they become the same but of a state/province
Do what Socialists always do, kill them along with teachers, free thinkers, anyone of faith, business owners & anyone else who does not agree with their death cult ideology.
Ah Ivan, I see you have a deep hatred for anything resembling a left… I wonder why Pedro Sanchés hasn’t got rid of Felipe VI yet… Or why Sweden and Denmark still have got theirs.
Unless you’re referring to Socialists as in Communists
Les européistes ou eurofédéralistes ont quand même bien évolué, la preuve par l’Histoire des constatations :
– La construction européenne est le bonheur sur Terre il faut plus d’Europe
– La construction européenne ne va pas assez vite il faut plus d’Europe
– La construction européenne ne fonctionne pas bien il faut plus d’Europe
– La construction européenne est inefficace et contre productive il faut plus d’Europe
– La construction européenne est viciée, bloquée, construite sur de mauvaise bases inamovibles il faut plus d’Europe
– la construction européenne est en train de détruire l’Europe il faut plus d’Europe
Le diagnostic évolue, mais malheureusement pas la solution préconisée.
Yannick
Unfortunately not all who come here understand French language. A pity, I agree. So, this is the nearest I could make of it.
XXXXXX
The Europeanists or eurofederalists have continued to evolve, the proof is there in the History of its events:
– The European construction is happiness on Earth, so we must have more Europe
– European construction is not going fast enough so we need more Europe
– The European construction does not work well and we must have more Europe
– European construction is inefficient and counterproductive, it must have more Europe
– The European construction is flawed, blocked, built on irremovable bad bases it needs more Europe
– European construction is destroying Europe lets have more Europe
The diagnosis is evolving, but unfortunately not via the recommended solution.
@Yannick
French, the original Ministry of Truth’s (1635) ‘Newspeak’.
@ Frenchman Yannick’s………: “European construction is destroying Europe- more Europe is needed”…..?
Maybe one must not take Catherine’s translation of Yannick’s “EU hype?” too literally- or believe in Tarquin’s (thank you both) historical “1635 Absolutism & Dumas’s romantics?
Sorry, but isn’t “European-ism, Pro-European-ism (= “European construction”) and EU’ism” one and the same? If misunderstood, please elaborate.
Is his “neologism” comment saying- EU’ism is destroying Europe true- or is it “quixotic”?
I’d gladly replace the current grotesque display of nation-states with a mature construct. Unfortunately, a vast majority of the europeans still clings to the ‘make the tribes great again’ mantra that brought down the bridges put in place by the roman empire.
Make the Roman Empire Great again
Another nonsense, I’m afraid…
I suggest it isn’t a case of “making tribes great ” but just a vast majority who are happy to have a tribe and the sense of personal identity it brings….. rather than being forced into becoming a faceless figure wearing one of 510 million bland, grey, ill fitting suits
So much difference between nation state nationalism and EU-nationialism right?
Yes, a tremendous difference between a primitive tribal approach and a more mature construct based on a rational assessment of organizational needs.
I would suggest a “construct based on a rational assessment of organizational needs” is communism
Why would you argue that Paul?
Because he’s a dumbass who has no clue what communism is.
The EU to these clowns is both “4th reich” AND “EUSSR”.
This is their level of knowledge. U can’t ask more of them.
I would.
yes
Absolutely
With the present level of democracy, more centralised power would make it even closer to the dreaded USSR or USA, both controlled by Oligachic structures…
We’d rater have a loose federation of independant democratic states with a Swiss like high level of decentralization…
Are you sure ? Do you know what you are asking? Think twice! Stay away of these type of questions!
Straying away from hard or unliked questions is a death sentence to rationality
@miguel
Know that
Ivan
Paul X
Catherine the conspiracy nut
And Tarquin
Are the site’s local haters.
They love to hate this site and the EU so much they are always here. Crying and moaning about the EU will end “any day now”.
…for the last 4 years at least lol
Yes.the question is how the 80% of the European population who opposing this will be convinced.
it will be not easy but we have to do something to find rapidly together, remember the war between the North and South of US before marriage of 51 States. We can do it without War in the E. U.
Nato is the alliance that has kept the peace in Europe. The EU is a grand Mafia that creates prohibitions so that crime and exploitation can thrive.
With the like of Farage as a MEP it may be more like the Russian Mafia.
Farage has put himself out of a job. How many Russian politicians do that?
@Rob
What a silly comment.
Every day of the week!
Nope. Because it would be the fourth Reich… Germans took all without a single bullet! Fortunately Britain went out at the right moment…
Reich translates as empire. There was the Holy Roman empire, German empire and all of a sudden a Reich. Interesting attempt of dissociation by the Brits
Its really working out well for Britain aint it😂
The only question is why? Ambitious politicians would clearly love the idea because of the power… ambitious corporations would love the idea because of the financial potential… but what’s in it for the average person on the street who lives in a small town and is happy to have the sense of community that comes with it and is proud of their nationality…what is the physical benefit to these people of being homogenised into just being one in a sea of 510 Million Europeans?..
Because
a) You’re already one in a sea of a few millions…
b) Being all together guarantees that we’ll be stronger. A United Europe will have a stronger hand in international Politics, more efficient usage of Europe’s resources to allow for the thriving of every single individual citizen of Europe, every single Nation!
The Nations wont stop existing, they wouldn’t be states anymore sure, but its would just be the union of several Nation-States into a stronger State.
yes
Come on, you really expect us to believe that the creation of a EU Nation has not been the goal of this whole exercise all along lol. The EU has a parliament that can make laws that affect 500000000 people, an executive, their diplomats have diplomatic immunity, the EU Has it’s own flag and anthem, it claims that there is such a thing as an EU citizen of which there would be about 500000000. Now we are hearing that the EU wants an army allegedly to protect trade routes, that this army would fight wars side by side with the USA in the middle east just as powerful EU Nations France,UK and Germany ofcourse is not talked about, but to any halfway intelligent person this is an obvious consequence of an EU army.
I am glad that now there is talk of a Republic at least finally the truth can come out, maybe Brexit and the threat of Italexit etc. is finally forcing the EU to push forward with the ultimate final step, the declaration of the EU Nation.
No, it’s the last thing I’d want to see, ever.
Federalism is the key not a Republik.
We are all different, but in the same time we are all europeans.
With federalism can be governed better.
Everyone should conserve their identity.
Perhaps a federal republic would be the right way :)
See Switzerland.
Switzerland is the perfect example!
NO-GO! Next election SPD will resend Schulz to Brussels. After voters have sent him home in Germany.
what does German Politics have to do with a European republic?
Guys, we either turn into a serious European Confederation or we just cease to exist. At the same time the central government has to take in consideration needs and issues of southern EU countries as well. Germany and France are not the only EU countries. We ALL matter, not just the wealthy ones!
Bella merda la UE
I don’t think that becoming a European Republic is really good prospect. Do you really believe that some independent and plentiful countries in Europe will want to be a part of one country? That “country” also won’t transcend some most powerful nations, so I ‘m convinced it’s quite irrationally. EU brings lots of benefits to its countries like economical interactions, free trade and traveling , despite it there are lots of wealthy countries which can be a great associate in all spheres. Also in my opinion EU gives some countries an opportunity to mean something in global scale, that’s quite important for them. So, i think creating a European Republic can bring some bad consequences like local wars, disputes and so on. There won’t be any benefits.
Yes, if the neoliberal lunacy was dropped and we adopted a mixed social-capitalism system. Let Capitalism do what it does best and let socialism do what it does best.
And let them who never got a vote to dictate to us, Oh lets not forget all the banks Ireland bailed out.
Republic ..nope, kingdome with an emperor with no power… as in constitutional monarchy…, yes…, republics always lead to dictatorships..they are no good… just look at the USA… aka trumpghanistan..
Seems fun but who’d be the monarch?
If it has a powerful army yes and based on equal rights without Germany sucking all the wealth of the EU
Germany sucking the wealth? Mate Germany provides most of that wealth😂
No
no
No! It would not be a Democracy but a Bureaucracy!
Automatically even if its a democracy
no
It s a Nightmare man! No!!!!
No chance
absolutely yes
The American model can be the basis for the European Republic, and any other grouping of neighbouring countries in other parts of the world. What can be wrong with the best parts of each European nation expanded to the maximum under the direction of an elected President.
@John Costigane
Hmmm, a bit Adolfesque methinks.
I support the ideea of an european federal republic with all my heart. I am a true liberal federalist.
@Valentin
Great concept, it will cause great distress when if ever implemented.
As long as the death penalti for corrupt polititions was made law.
Aye 😉
I swear on my true secret name, my family, my ancestors, my country and my religion i will do everything i can to make this happen, the devil shall not win!
Sure!
Non merci.
No, thanks.
Minimally partial centralisation of European armies should happen.
A certain Unity should be obtained without damaging the nations their sovreignity that much.
Its a yes nor a no because the whole concept hasnt been properly explored, yet.
A pure yes or no automatically leads to tearing apart Europa
No
Of course not.
Of course! :-)
Not only NO, but HELL NO.
Sure!
Definitely yes
Absolutely not. The present democratic level of the EU is of such poor quality that I do not give it one single chance.
Would you like to participate to the election of the Slovenian commissioner? And Spaniards to elect the British rep? In your country the main bureaucrats are perhaps elected? So basically you are no democrat but just xenophobic
Dan Ivanov Please explain your explanation. Your response runs the risk if being not understandable.
@Dan
Not all cultures are equal to assume otherwise is illogical and dangerous.
Please, for god’s sake. No.
Yes please
European Humanitarian Republic
the mission would be to help everyone else who is in trouble
if in doubt we would ask Francis
What? Like a Reich you mean?
More like a United States of Europe (only less corrupt), oh cynical one😜
Less corrupt…. teehee…. try buying an empty briefcase in Brussels! ;-)
Never. It’s just a big BS. It’s just a globalist business.
No!
But the 27 National parliaments are challenged to subject this EU proposal to the scrutiny of the electorate! Never ever to be decided by the EU, some EU selected individuals, journalists, fan clubs, Professors & writers who freely roam the EU.
The ongoing guesswork could be given the coup de grâce by using the much feared but skillfully avoided (why?) democratic option in a BINDING referendum- held in all 27 sovereign member states.
And please refrain to undermine fair democratic processes through excuses, avoidance, step by step trickery; the many sponsored & rich individuals fronting as: “Founders” of Foundations, Open Societies, Think Tanks, “Democracy labs”, EU reputation managers and paid EU political lobbyists & blatant marketeers.
Online Analytical Processing, AI & “Deep learning” are anyways crunching our comments and supplying enough feedback!
Still not convinced? If undecided and afraid of 27 referenda, please shelf that idea for maybe a generation.
Given time- most “things” work themselves out! No EU destructive political Blitzkrieg!
Better for Europeans.
Just to protect them from US bullying
Federalism is the way to go.
@Octavian
By ‘go’ you mean die/expire/terminate of course!
Fdx!!
Seriously? Fix some major issues in the European Union and then think of a United Republic. One issue is unifying all the salaries, taxes, prices of goods all over the Eurozone and then go for the next level of unification forms. E.U. will be demolished in few years. Brexit is just the beginning!
More centralization (unity) would actually allow the Europe to tackle these problems more effectively because it would be harder to gridlock the whole decision making process by any one state.
@Nicholas
The unification you speak of equates to COMMUNISM!
Yes – as we can see and feel in so many countries we need the european republic
Absolutely yes. National governments are a waist of money and time.
Ruled by Germany then
Absolutely yes. We don’t need national governments fighting like medieval warlords to keep their power and put the whole continent back.
we are allready in a federal form , the only difference from what USA and EU has is the thing that countries have some what a better connection as a diplomatic level. It will never work because in the end we will still keep the “national boundries” relating them to language . 1/2 languages is to be imposed . Wichone will it be . Most of europeans know english …brexit might actually happen ..and then what ? French and German as international language ? :D
Or luxemburgish?
It is a problem as we have at least 10 major different languages. Which one should be used ?
We could use Esperanto as en administrative language. Its easy to learn. From there just wait for it to spread.
It will be pretty hard to make 741 milion people learn another language just because it is easy . I think we are fine the way we are
I’ve no doubt following Brexit the French will kick off demanding their language is adopted, lets face it their nationalistic self importance is the reason behind the Strasbourg/Brussels travelling circus debacle, I’m sure they have no qualms demanding billions more of taxpayers money be wasted converting everything to French….but at the end of the day English is the language of international business, so if the EU chooses to pander to Gallic pride rather than common sense then they will only have themselves to blame
@Alex
Esperanto is an artificial language. It is dehumanising!
What should be the spoken language? The more unity there will be the weaker Europe will become because internally there is a lot of lack of collaboration. The so called confederate states had their own civil war before forming today’s united States…
Latin?
Latin. There are cases, by the way, where so-called dead languages were re-invigorated to become the official idiom of a new: Hebrew in Israel.
I am saying that even under same language Americans had their war before forming… So what if there is no common language… Agreed on… Not to speak about approach to governing the people.
I think perhaps Esperanto for the west as an administrative language for the ‘federal’ institutions. This would also make it spread over time as knowing the language gives people an advantage on the job market. Its easy to learn too.
If a similar construct could be made for eastern European languages, we’d have already reduced the languages by a lot.
English is the language of global business, the EU is free to adopt a centralist policy and force people to learn Esperanto, but don’t expect to be able to communicate with the rest of the world using it
Now you know why Britain voted out.
Because they were under the delusion that they could turn back the clock and allowed stupidity and fear to cloud rationality.
Hope you will enjoy being in the Republic run by Germany . Didn’t work out so good the last time did it ?
ye get rid f althose blood suckers royalities
Bollocks Harald
@Herald
The GDP/capita of EU nations with monarchies is higher than the rest – do the math.
Republican EU nations tend to be more corrupt than EU monarchist nations – refer to the TI annual report for evidence.
As the countries within the EU are too different, the result of Federalism will be inconsistency, very complicate, time-consuming and extremely expensive!
But it may be worth it in the long run.
The individual European countries have less and less to say on the world stage and may not have the weight to tackle large corporations on their own (for long).
Yes, it would be expensive and time-consuming, but almost everything is. The question is, is the time and other resources spent effectively?
And I think it will be, as I said, in the long run.
Marcus, we did all have dreams, and this is ok, but the truth is far away from it. A Federalism should stay on REAL democracy, which we don’t have, it should stay on cooperative establishments – which is absolutely impossible, as long you do have different causes and different interests! The world is not ruled by state forms – the world is ruled by lobbyists – which arises out of the capitalistic-system!
I personnally agree with the idea of integration, and why not as a Republic ? Many of the questions being asked in other posts are the same that people living in smaller entities (e.g. Burgundy) could have asked hundreds of years ago, and they ended up melted in countries much bigger than theirs that nobody questions now.
Our history is that of a slow integration and when it stops or rolls back, in usually ends up in blood, for the simple reason that we share a common and relatively small and continuous territory (except the Brits), in which, as a result, borders are in many ways arbitrary and questionnable.
And to the question «what for ?» I’ve read somewhere… Well, because together we are stronger, especially when you have to deal in the long run, culturally, economically and -let’s hope it never happens- militarilly with entities with 1.5bn inhabitants, or that have sole agressivity against us and our share values.
So yes, let’s make Europe stronger giving it more democratic strength, but not forgetting that we need time to have the majority of Europeans convinced.
@Christian
The EU cannot compete with China now.
Soon the EU will not be able to compete with India.
In the long run, the EU will not be able to compete with Africa.
The EU is too small to compete, to divided to compete, too feeble to compete.
The EU children of today will die as 2nd-tier world citizens in 70-90 years time..
Jesus Christ, how thick are you people? A Republic run by Germany, Merkel and a bunch of Liberal snowflakes, no thanks.
yes
Would you give up your own identity for existing solemly as a member and part of a group or organization?
Dori Cucer the republic
NO
Consider this… https://sputniknews.com/europe/201604051037526818-roman-repulic-eu-history/
Consider this…
Sputnik News is a news network run by the Russian government and has been shown to spread, not just twisted truths, but outright lies.
Ah, but if you want the same from a more hip-liberal source and if you read German, consider this: https://www.huffingtonpost.de/2017/02/01/david-engels-buergerkrieg_n_14546506.html
@Bruno
Great article, thank you.
Yes. The structure would need a serious update so that its more self reliant and somewhat more democratic (only somewhat tho), but a more united Europe would make us all the stronger on the world stage for it. Really tired of being a geopolitical dwarf.
Yes! I support the transformation of the European Union, from it’s current system of a union of national states to a union of and for the European people! By the way http://www.volteuropa.org is a new Pan- and Pro-European political party which drives in this direction.
Would you support the EU becoming a ‘European Republic’?
I laughed out loud when I read this on here today.
What a really humorous question and straight after Israel won the ‘European’ song contest. What a farce!
This question presents close to something out of a ‘Mid Summer Nights Dream.’ How deranged the entire EU project has become. Any and all people still tied to this damage control must ask themselves if they truly want to be associated with the gutter it has become. A Republic? Do you know what the word means? I can see Netanyahu your future ‘appointed’ President. ‘Sweet Jesus have mercy.’ I bet he can see himself as future EU President as well.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2018/05/13/israel-wins-eurovision-for-a-metoo-song-with-chicken-sounds/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.12fdd4bbabbb
So pleased British people have not completely lost their senses.
No, no!!!
I am not sure!
Aren’t we in reality not already there? Most people just live in denial. The few things that are still missing seem to be not enough to not make the EU true country. What we have is people trying to pretend it is not, searching for words when they really cannot help but say ‘this country’.
Yes, I would.
I somehow feel that British comments on this thread are inappropriate.
Would you support the EU becoming a ‘European Republic’?
To enable those worried about ‘British’ comments being inappropriate on this matter. As I am one of the ‘British’ posters here who wrote, do you know what a Republic means? Here is an explanation for those who find it difficult to follow that question and why I wrote as I did.
We British are such a fly in the ointment of unity. Tsk Tsk.
http://capitalismmagazine.com/2003/01/republic-democracy-whats-the-difference/
“Republic”…? You hit the pipe and now chasing dragons… You are barely keeping 20 something bunch stuck with duct tape in the so-called “Union”, and now you want a “republic”? Wake up, it will never happen. Too many inescapable differences.
As an addendum to the idea of supporting a European Republic, has this question been offered to the Swedish and Danish people. If not, what is it the rest of the 27 EU countries citizens are not being told?
Here is a surprise for all who read here. Why are we not being advised on this matter? I am very worried. Are we going to war and if so, with whom?
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/may/21/sweden-distributes-be-prepared-for-war-cyber-terror-attack-leaflet-to-every-home
And for fodder.
https://nypost.com/2018/01/17/sweden-is-preparing-its-people-for-war/
The only realistic prospect for a peaceful and prosperous survival of Europe is the creation of a European Republic. The countries who don’t want a full integration could remain in a loose form of members of the Union. But it would be a pity if we fail to make the majority understand the advantages of a mighty republic for its citizens. The return to nation states as in Germany or in Italy till the 19th century would be a huge political mistake as history can teach us. Our differences are outnumbered by a common approach to the rule of law. A citizen of Florida, California or Iowa is first of all an American despite different approaches on a number of things.
I hope that new generations will be more open to this democratic project.
Like many historical processes, it is difficult to see this issue clearly while we are in the thick of it. It is entirely possible that future generations will take unified European statehood for granted and have only vague recollections of the previous evolutionary steps (hunter-gatherer groups, villages, tribes, fiefdoms, feudal kingdoms, nation states). Imagine, one day the curmudgeonly deferenders of the European Republic will use the same Brexiteer arguments against the formation of a directly-elected UN Global Council. :)
I would love a new “European republic” with not only
Civil equality before the law
Political equality in the form of universal suffrage
Shared mechanisms to promote the common good
But also
Regions quasi-autonomous in food and energy
Short-circuit for food with “aquaponia” and “permaculture”
Transport as a Service with autonomous cars replacing private cars
(see Tony Seba https://youtu.be/2b3ttqYDwF0)
Most garages made free in the cities used for urban farms
Constitution by the people like in Iceland
Democratic system with people selected at random to decide
Billions invested in renewable energy and dismantling of coal and nuclear
Circular economy with heavy tax on single use plastic
San Francisco model for recycling
Earth/nature receiving a status of “to be protected”, companies using resources to be submitted to control of citizens
I do not think that nuclear energy should be dismantled. There’s am irrational fear of the nuclear nowadays. Nuclear Energy should be used as its a pretty clean energy and the nuclear waste can be easily managed nowadays. By not updating reactors, those that are being used are old and prone to being damaged as they do not have XXI Century technology built in, but rather plastered on them at best.
Never.
I would like everybody to become a citizen of the world, not one of a block against other blocks.
Since many years I am a dyed-in-the-wool supporter of the idea to establish the European Republic. I am grateful that Mrs. Guerot is heading this initiative. But I think it is unfortunate that Mrs. Guerot mixes her publications and pamphlets with feminist arguments. I am the son of a fully emancipated mother and a very liberal father. So, I do not have anything against women having equal rights, equal pay and all that. I am convinced most men in Europe share my attitude. So, why burden the fight for a European Republic with a feminist battle?
Secondly: Without the support from a big grass-roots movement we cannot succeed. For the party leaders in most democracies are not willing to lead but merely look where public opinion is drifting, and then they following. It’s like the boy with the big dog on the leash: he is looking where the dog wants to go and then takes him there. Meaning: we have to trigger such grass-roots movement and then the political leaders will follow. It is no secret that you cannot achieve this by intellectually challenging elaborations, long-winded phrase with a lot of strange words. We have to use plain language.
Thirdly: So far the discussion is too academic. Why not draft a constitution of the would-be European Republic? Only then the core questions will evolve: Would there be a plurality election or representative election, maybe a mix of both like in Germany? Which regions shall we include? Only the economic strong houses, with a view to lay the foundation for a strong currency? Is smaller (than the EU) perhaps better? Many cooks spoil the broth is a proverb with more than just a grain of truth. Is cultural diversity good or counter-productive? Which languages shall be the official ones? I have contemplated theses questions for many years, I am a former partner in global law firms and have now an international business in renewable energy. I would be happy to contribute to the debate. Here are some buzzwords:
Constitution: The German Grundgesetz is arguably the best modern constitution. It should serve as a blueprint.
Languages and Cultural Diversity: As Switzerland proves, you can have four official languages and cultural histories. No problem, but nevertheless I would recommend to limit it during the initial phase. Germany, France, Benelux, Austria, South Tyrol. In all these regions/countries you have French or German or both already as official language – with the exception of Netherlands, so let us add Dutch/Flemish as the third language. The European Republic would become (or remain, depends on your perspective) a member of the EU. Over time the Republic will work like a magnet and attract other regions: Venetia, Catalonia. Perhaps even the Poles after realising that the PiS party leads them down the garden path, back in time and right into the arms of the Russian Bear.
Head of State: a President, elected not by the people but by a special assembly. Any form of “direct democracy” inevitably and provably leads to the decline of democracy and facism. History and recent events prove that. If a president or gvernment has the direct support of the people in a referendum, why would care about the opposition in parlament or minorities? Look at Trump, look at Germany history, look a Erdogans Turkey. So-called direct democracy (and plurality vote) tend to distroy the rights of the minority voters. And in USA Trump did not even win the popular vote….
A single currency can only exist and survive in ONE state with ONE government and ONE budget. The Euro, in its present form, is NOT one currency but many currencies that merely share the identical bills, coins and denomination. That is why we have those recurring Euro crises. It will never stop. Therefore, the European Republic will either have a new currency, exclusive to itself, or the countries not joining the Republic have to abandon the Euro.
And finally: The movement pro European Republic shall not exclude right- or left wing parties. It shall not be labelled a one party undertaking. We welcome ANY support. It will be almost unavoidable that in the parlament of the new Republic we will see representatives of these parties. That is the price of democracy and we have to live with it. It is more important to win the support from the main stream parties across borders. If for example FPÖ or AfD or Front National join the movement, okay, as long as we can reach our goal. We will fight these guys then in the new European Republic.
@ Gerhard, RE: in response to just a few of your “advanced” suggestions:
* “The German Grundgesetz is arguably the best modern constitution.”
A: Sorry, arguably NOT the best! How can it, when it dates back to pre 1949 thinking, incorporates Articles of the Weimar Constitution and was imposed by the allies in 1949?
https://sourcebooks.fordham.edu/mod/CONST-DE.asp
* “direct democracy” inevitably and provably leads to the decline of democracy and facism”???
A: Applying your logic means that Switzerland is the least democratic state in Europe? Democracy = Facism? OMG!
* “ONE state with ONE government and ONE budget…….” (& ONE party with the name of “ANY political party”)……….. “?
A: This closely resembles today’s modern China’s People’s Republic.
The future “EU Republic” = China?
* “We will fight these guys then in the new European Republic.”
A: “Arguable” a very disturbed thinking & worrying future if your “ONE Europa PARTY” comes to power! A new era of European Romanticism = Totarialism?
Secularism should also be applied between the Economy & “Politicians Politics”- not only Church & State!
Please research more, because you are massively confused & on the proverbial “Holzweg”!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_national_constitutions
Republic is better than federation, no doubt, but nobody knows that the EU is a federation of nation states and what that means. The question is: what do people know. The name is good but we need to address people not issues. In addressing issues we tend to address ourselves, the “educated people” who may be part of the problem.
Yes I would!
Of course not. It should be a monarchy. All the European monarchs should fuse together into a blue-blooded chimera, which we should crown as supreme monarch.
Of course. The member state governments have too narrow interests and are too easily pulled in populistic directions. We need the EU more than ever to counter this.
As long as the democratic process is strengthened I don’t see any subverting here.
On the other hand I see a clash coming on between nationalists and globalists, but that will come anyway, and to be ready for this I definitely vote for an EU republic.
Søren – it will be war , youre vote wont do you any good then, will it?
I hardly believe it will come to that. The vast majority of citizens support the EU. All statistics show that.
Søren – Will you ask the citizens of the EU if they want your antidemocratic empire or just follow the usual Brussels model of ignoring the wishes of the people ?
As for the statistics you mention it’s all down to the questions being asked, for instance Brussels asked the question ‘Should security be improved across the EU ?’ Only an idiot would say no but Brussels uses the answer to claim everyone wants Brussels to control migration & security which is both wrong and dishonest.
(headdesk) I specifically said that the democratic processes was to be strengthened so there is no anti democratic empire in my EU republic.
End of debate from my part. This draws towards being silly.
I guess we have to go through darker time before Europe is finally back in everyone’s mind and we have to build it back from scratch you don’t fix something this complex that is not working
NO!
No and no!
ASAP
By republic you mean a dictatorship. Fortunately the peoples in the EU are rejecting the European experiment as it is now and they will never except an enforced republic.
Absolutely:
Because the EU needs to function better.
Tge main reason is the council and its natural flaws (28 indirectly legitimised national governments which are elected for their national policies and which also only need to fear their national voters, unanimity in every question (de facto), It is the most powerful institution)
The council needs to be reformed!:
e.g.: Every country should be able to elect represenatives direcrtly into the council or every government has a EU-embassador who is stting in the new perpetuate council when there is no minister/ prime minister meeting.
So valid negatiations can go on all the time.
So basically the parlament should be representing the total of the EU – citizens and the council the member states.
The Parlament should be elected via EU-partie lists with regional and national election destricts. Example: e.g A party gets a seat in a dictrict when a numver of e.g. 700 000 votes is reached. All votes that coukd not validate a seat in a regional district are counted for the national district. Again remaining votes are counted on a european level. So it is ensured that people from all over europe sit in the parliament.
The parliament election should not be about national agendas it shpuld be about a european discussion. Tge council is for national agendas. And both the parliament and the council need to agree to a new law (The council should not be able to force something without the parliament like it is now the case). The required majorities (especially in the council) should be dependent on the topic. Before anybody from a small country complains that bigger countries would then force things through:
Every country has one seat in the council. Form alliences with other countries in informal talks.
And there won’t be much topics decides with 50%+1.
It would be rather 60/66/75/100%
So 12 countries (40%+1) cozld blockade anything.
9 countries would be 33%.
7countroies 25%+1
There are only 5 bigger countries after Brexit (Ger, Fra, Ita, Esp, Pol)
Absolutely:
Because the EU needs to function better.
Tge main reason is the council and its natural flaws (28 indirectly legitimised national governments which are elected for their national policies and which also only need to fear their national voters, unanimity in every question (de facto), It is the most powerful institution)
The council needs to be reformed!:
e.g.: Every country should be able to elect represenatives direcrtly into the council or every government has a EU-embassador who is stting in the new perpetuate council when there is no minister/ prime minister meeting.
So valid negatiations can go on all the time.
So basically the parlament should be representing the total of the EU – citizens and the council the member states.
The Parlament should be elected via EU-partie lists with regional and national election destricts. Example: e.g A party gets a seat in a dictrict when a numver of e.g. 700 000 votes is reached. All votes that coukd not validate a seat in a regional district are counted for the national district. Again remaining votes are counted on a european level. So it is ensured that people from all over europe sit in the parliament.
The parliament election should not be about national agendas it shpuld be about a european discussion. Tge council is for national agendas. And both the parliament and the council need to agree to a new law (The council should not be able to force something without the parliament like it is now the case). The required majorities (especially in the council) should be dependent on the topic. So there would be a dialogous process between the council and the parliament needed. (Member states and EU-Ppulation; National intrests and european Intrests.) Before anybody from a small country complains that bigger countries would then force things through:
Every country has one seat in the council. Form alliences with other countries in informal talks.
And there won’t be much topics decides with 50%+1.
It would be rather 60/66/75/100%
So 12 countries (40%+1) cozld blockade anything.
9 countries would be 33%.
7countroies 25%+1
There are only 5 bigger countries after Brexit (Ger, Fra, Ita, Esp, Pol)
i’d like to live under an european federation
Yes! ASAP
only if it will be a Federal Republic, otherwise I would prefer a European Federation
Yes, Federal Relublic
Better then what we have now!
If it would mean politicians be held accountable for once instead of trying to subvert the decisions of each nation with their quotas…
No.
Defenetly yes!
Absolutely Yes, that or something similar. The important thing is to strip the national institutions of more sovereignty, you can’t trust nobody less then the national parties! Look at the lies they keep telling, Ivan look into the untruthful and deceptive facts the ukip presented to the brits before the referendum. Just for their personal interest. Every system of government has leaks and corruption, but at least at the EU level is not high as in the 28 domestic arena.
Personally i dont care about Europe because we would never be mart of something that vile
Ivan – actually I actively studied history since I was 3 years old, starting from the dinosaurs and arriving till our sad time on this earth. Putting together nazism and communism (without wanting to defend the first or the latter) is difficult enough, if you add Europeanism to the two I know you just type things that randomly appear in your mind seeming bright thoughts when most of the time are just sophisticated words. But don’t worry, it’s true, the people has still power and democracy must be preserved. That’s why Scotland is probably coming back home and England will follow, be assured.
At first of course YES! But are se prepare for this? The 2008-2009 crissis show us that the national interest, especialy of development countries was higher than Europe interest.
Meanwhile Brexit show us that even a oldiest country like UK didn’t understood what îs the EU interest ?!?!
Also the emigrants policy was failed.
So, we are too far by a common future of EU Republic, federal or not.
Of course.
No but i would fight against 8t with my last breath
No.
Sim, apoiaria a constituição da federação europeia de Estados. República Federal da Europa. Só assim os europeus poderão defender e desenvolver a nossa civilização. Há que partilhar algo para manter o essencial. A xenofobia e o nacionalismo são vírus lançados pelos nossos inimigos para nos dividir e enfraquecer. Putin não perde tempo nem oportunidades… Trump é um aliado do Putin e é um perigo para a prosperidade da Europa!!! Europeus, abri os olhos e uni-vos pelos vossos filhos e netos.
Portugal e a Grécia são de facto excelentes exemplos do bem que a UE nos trouxe.. temos mesmo de abrir os olhos… E desligar a TV!
Estar debaixo da árvore sem noção da floresta em que ela se integra nem é bom para árvore nem para a floresta que a acolhe.
Who’s to be the dark sith lord of this one?…
You can borrow our indian Sithler Lord :D
Arshad – does he have an evil look? Does he likes the idea of forcing an united states of Europe upon 500 million people? If the answer is yes, he’s hired!
Evil look – check
Forcing things on people – check
Can he force 500 million – proven record of imposition on more than a billion..check
Can’t get better than this :P
Arshad – Hahahaha he’s the man for us! Please export him Arshad
It’s the only way to create a strong and equal Europe, for now people with a very old mentality in politics still think about their little piece of land and this it is not Good for anyone….
To be re-organised in the first European Empire!
If it happens we simply riot. Get ready for very violent civic unrest if anyone tries.
No, never. U€ will disappear. Stop the German invasion of the continent! Merkel go home!
Yes . With one condition….Merkel will retrain.
If Europe wants to survive, should become a sort of a federal supra-national State
Yes
No. And I consider myself as a Europeanist person but the EU should be more worried about agreeing on determined common rules for policies such as migration, education, healthcare or free market than about being a single state. If we additionally consider the growing power of euroskeptical politicians, this issue would only make a bigger cleavage among us.
Republic is ok first. Later on Democracy might be a useful dream like the one we already have. Some, most of us. More or less.
YES! That’s what we urgently NEED.
No This will mean trying to unite in every way such a big variety of nations with different past, present and very different cultures and mentalities, which seems impossible for now. Also it will lead to heavily centralized power..
Yes if the central defining element of a state is fulfilled. Working outside borders
Yes!
Hahah
Most definitely YES
As much as I love the idea of united Europe, I disagree with it becoming a republic just because of how diverse countries are and how much they differ from each other, so it would be a chaos, even though we have some of this, but not on extreme kind of level. Also, because I feel attached to my homeland, I’d love to sustain my primal citizenship, nonetheless every citizen of EU member states is still an EU citizen. All in all,it would be a complete disaster since countries don’t want to lose their souverenity
With all my hands. EU Federation!
No! Yes to European Federation
I think a federation would be better.
That doesn’t exclude each other. Germany consist of 16 states, and is itself a federation and a republic.
Definitely, yes. A federal republic is what we need.
I am for European federation. As much as I understand each state is very diverse culturally, economically, we speak different languages, etc. I also believe in one unique European identity. For me it is a logical and very pragmatic conclusion. We either act together as one power or we will be separated and split among the other powers…Russia, China, USA
Exactly.
Without a doubt.
Yes or a federation
We still need to fix some issues with the current EU elections. The polls still don’t reflect the reality of EU politics, and the EU Commission still isn’t elected directly by its people.
You also don’t directly elect your national government, you elect a Parliament which than forms a government, how is that different and why is it so bad?…
Because the EU elections are masqueraded as national elections, and are mostly oblivious to who are the most probable candidates for the EU commission for each EU party.
Don’t you already enjoy the 4th Reich?
Yes, with full democratic rights and enough powers in a turbulent world.
Yes as long as I was a citizen (instead of being cast out to living in bitain :(. )
A federal republic might be a good system, yes, definitely more union needed.
Let’s turn the EU into something like the old HRE instead.
Absolutely! We cannot decline into a satellite of the US or satrapies of Russia, Europe must reclaim Its destiny!
I do feel like Europe should eventually unite into a single state, it might still take us a long time to achieve this, but a generation of people, that were born into a world of internet and everything being connected now, more than ever, is growing, and they might not be blinded by mindless nationalism and will be able to see the bigger picture, they might be the ones ready for a truly united Europe
No, each nation is too different both in terms of culture and interests. In addition to that, larger entities are significantly harder to steer correctly, more so the more power they have (and the ever-growing European welfare state gives a lot of it).
And lastly, I simply don’t agree with the radical progressiveness happening under the current political leadership on one hand (I have enough of political correctness, gender and race quotas in the UK, thank you very much), and on the other hand I can clearly see a total lack of any willingness to make meaningful actions as opposed to empty promises and acts to make a show.
No, the European cooperation should be based purely on mutually beneficial and unanimously agreed terms.
If Europe is an actual direct democracy, for instance inspired from Switzerland, yes. If it’s anything else including Spitzenkandidaten, no.
Most importantly, I don’t want economic ideologies embedded into the Constitution, such as ordoliberalism and such. Define Europe as a political organisation of society centred around its citizens, and leave them the freedom to define their path.
If Europe is an actual direct democracy, for instance inspired from Switzerland, yes. If it’s anything else including Spitzenkandidaten, no.
Most importantly, I don’t want economic ideologies embedded into the Constitution, such as ordoliberalism and such. Define Europe as a political organisation of society centred around its citizens, and leave them the freedom to define their path.
If Europe is an actual direct democracy, for instance inspired from Switzerland, yes. If it’s anything else including Spitzenkandidaten, no.
Most importantly, I don’t want economic ideologies embedded into the Constitution, such as ordoliberalism and such. Define Europe as a political organisation of society centred around its citizens, and leave them the freedom to define their path.
I would love a EU FEDERATION. We can’t compete against countries like the US, China or India if we don’t stand together. If we were united we would have the biggest army, the 2nd biggest economy…
Furthermore, I think we share a lot of cultural identity. Americans refer to us as europeans, not as Spanish, French or German. Our federation could still teach our countries cultre.
Yes, but it must be democratic, and accountable by and for the European peoples. Parties need to have mandated by which to govern and these mandates need to be harmonised across the member states to ensure alignment of issues and how we solve them.
This must happen. It’s the only way to prevent the EU from falling apart due to foreign influence (war-related immigration, fascist propaganda, etc), making every single country in it a pond in US-RU’s geopolitical chess. We need to protect ourselves by joining forces. The EU is stronger and safer together.
Please don’t listen to the trolls and foreign propagandists on this thread. Think for yourself. The EU represents the most successful social and political endeavor in the history of mankind. It represents a peaceful, successful future for humanity, as opposed to the regressive, isolationist past that has failed us so many times.
This seems like the worst place to get an objective answer but…
Hell yeah. Would be proud to call someone from Romania, Finland or France my compatriot.
Not in the current state of affairs. The lack of transparency on a continental scale is still too big in combination with a lack of representation for smaller nations being drowned out by the bigger ones considering parliamentary votes.
Does not mean working closer together is a bad thing, but we are absolutely not there yet.
I see europe coming together and forming a sovereign republic as a major step in the future of humanity as it would mean one step closer to a more cosmopolitan future. Also a single european government would likely mean better focus on the sciences and arts to help advance humanity forwards
Yes absolutely. But not if that “republic” is organized like the current European Union.
Frist we have to reform the union, make it more democratic, more transparent, have more ways for the people to influence politics and then we can have unity.
Yes, like the united states of Europe. Following the german example of strong federal rules and local specificity.
Certainly not, because it would completely abolish the principle of subsidiarity. Plus, it would mean that taxpayers’ money from rich countries will be used almost exclusively in poor countries with no option to stop it.
YES!!!!
True universal suffrage (every citizen), or with age, criminal, and health restrictions?
Yes – only if neoliberal influences are removed and the EU places the wellbeing of it’s citizens first and resolves to maintain the borders of the EU.
It depends. If it ended up like the Netherlands or Scandinavian countries, hell yeah! Otherwise… well, we’d have to see. Maybe start with a smaller federation consisting only of countries that have their shit together.
I am greatly in favour of unity and believe that one world state is the eventual end goal, but my own country is simply ran way better than many others in Europe (and the world) and I am selfish enough not to want to lose that.
Oh, one step closer to a European Soviet Union.
Let me guess, without asking the people again? Things like this is exactly why Eurosceptics are winning, just continue :-)
I think the is no way to create an unitary European Republic because our countries are deeply in our minds
But creating an European Federation makes sense to have a real political union limited to European subjects
On my dead body.
In democracy we just hsve to out vote you.
Then we can arrange for your wish too if you insist.
Very interesting points, on this debate. As Rome civilization, the base of our culture, even if many wrongly disagree with it but of course making treasure of all other European cultural and social progresses and societies, wasn’t built in a day; so we must now continue to improve the good work of the European Union since, as it was said at the beginning of the book, the Maastricht Treaty and continue to pursue a more perfect Union throughout the much needed reforms mainly consisting in a more functional budget and on increased powers to the executive organs but also enlarging free access to Justice for everyone including a centralised Pension & Welfare control.
For sure, facing global challenges need global answers! Nationalism is the new racism…
The diversity and uniqueness of each member state make it not very realistic to form a EU republic particularly within member states, citizens have been wasting energy on pro and counter-EU rather than well-beings of the union and its citizen as a whole. It appears that EU is still in a nation-building process. Before the emergence of a EU identity, it is difficult to imagine the formation of a EU Republic can realize. However, without laying down a republican political framework, EU would also have difficulties to grow solidarity. By waiting, EU might need to assume some very important function of a state. A unified defense force appears to be important paving the road to a EU Republic.
Nation states are a thing of the past. They can no longer tackle the problems of a world that evolves ever faster. And greater centralisation of decisions only dilutes what little democracy we have left. The process of integration of the European Union is something new, above and beyond the nation state, that redefines itself as needed. It is not a finished product, nor should it be. It doesn’t need a new label, just a better way to insure more inclusive and transparent democratic decision-making processes at all levels.
Yes!
Increase political accountability. Replace the council with a chamber of member states directly elected by the respective populations in order to look at interest of nation states. Get rid of unanimity. So laws and policies are passed by the parliament (mayoritiy of EU’s total population) and a myoritiy of member states (new council chamber of member states). Additionally the comission/government should be supported by a relative mayority in the parliament, and comissares/ministers/secretaries in the comission/government should be only recruited from the parties that gerantee the mayority in the parliament. So political accountability (one of the prerequisites of a functionable democracy) is improved and an honest political disussion about EU policies is possible.
Additionally the EU and the member states have to decide which level has the power over which subject.
I have participated in a study group coordinated by ALDE IM,all my conclusions are well understood by Guy Verhofstadt.
My fundamental reform proposals are related with the american federation.
I can outline the fact that we need an efficient EC made out of 12 commisioners ,European Army,Counterterrorism Agency,Frontex,EU president elected directly by citizens,common fiscal policy.
I would like to see a more centralized Europe.
The prime ministers of the countries would go to the European Parliment and they could decide the outcome of upcoming events, things. People could keep their nationalities anf faith etc. We are ALL Europeans, our basic, modern standards of way of living are the same. For example, I can not think more or less about a Polish man or a French or Hungarian. We are all humans on the same continent and this is how we could remain relevant on the stage of world politics.
Definitely YES! Most of the people saying no come from less developed countries of Europe and share the opinion that it’s bad because they don’t want someone else (foreign) to design their laws and run their societies. And my favorite one, “taking advantage of them”.
My message/question to them is that if current and past leaders of your countries were so smart, capable and trustworthy, why are your countries year after year sinking ever deeper? Quality of life and purchasing power getting lower and lower? People of your countries moving to western EU.
I come from Croatia and I believe that fully integrated and united EU is exactly what every European needs in order to increase their quality of life and protect their interests.
Yes, fascism is coming back.
And, Trump – who idolizes Hitler, and wants to be dictator of the US – is a fascist.
He wants to control the media – has been saying “fake news” since he was elected, when the only fake news I’ve seen is coming from HIM. In other words – he wants the media to be his own personal propaganda machine.
Like Hitler.
Trump uses”divide and conquer” to set Americans against each other, when in reality, we should be united – against HIM.
And, Trump wants a war so badly, he can taste it. Because a war is what will allow him to assume greater power than he should have – and become the dictator he longs to be.
This may sound stupid – but I advise that you take a look at Star Wars, and how the Emperor – who started out as a Senator – manipulated everyone and managed to seize complete power.
This is Trump, baby.
America was divided and dissatisfied with political leadership long before Trump came along. The Democrat left would be far better off if they focused on why they lost and re-examined their own ideology, policies and inadequacies. This is not just about Trump. There’s a great global phenomenon going on here because many people are so fed up with leftist liberal style politicians that have not been listening to the warning signs. Many people in Europe are sick of being dictated to by career bureaucrats in Brussels who are entrenched in their globalistic ideology and own self interests. People are standing up to the EU and saying enough is enough, we want democracy, we want to control our own nation and our own destiny. What you on the left call populism and try so hard to market as a terrible thing is in fact democracy at it’s finest. These patriots are trying to do what can best be summed up in the words of your great Republican President, Abraham Lincoln as ensuring, “government of the people, for the people, by the people, shall not perish from the earth.”
A European Republic is definitely what we need.
Yes! Of course!
Debating the dreams of european plutocracy, only seeds division and distrust in all eu-organizations.
No. The eu is an antidemocratic Orwellian nightmare. His sovereignity doesn’t lie in the people of europe but in a few burocrats in bruxelles so it’s unable, by design, to be a functional organization.It’s not doing the interest of a single member state except france and germany; the euro is a german cage and was a gigantic mistake, we are Witnessing the effects; the Schengen area is becoming de facto invalid due to all the border controls enforce to fight against germany foolish open border policy; if you dare to express free speech you are engaging in hate speech, if you dare to question milions of ILLEGALS economic migrants pouring into the continent you are called anti-immigration/xenofobic (depends on the daily orders from bruxelles to “journalist”); if you dare to question if a religion who preach death to infedels,c artoonist etc etc that wants the sharia law, that is antiscientif can coexist with a modern democratic society you are called an islamophobic..
have i left out something?
Oh yes, if you dare to enforce the law of your country you are called a sovranist *which apparently now is a bad thing..
tell me again why should i “love” the eu; for the erasmus? Go grow a pairs you soyboy snowflake.
The only way to keep this mess alive is less eu, less regulation less power to bruxelles (or none at all) and giving back the freedom and power to the people of the sovereign nations crushed by the eu technocracy
…and yes!
Yes.
Lol no. It crazy. Nothing would get done. Everyone would be constantly fighting over the allocation of resources. Adding an extra layer of government is the perfect recipe for disaster on all levels. The EU regulates already too much of nation states markets and society. Making the EU a republic would kill all remaining freedoms in an attempt to centralize power in one government with all reaching power.
Defenetly yes
Definitely yes,
Yes. Sooner or later it will be best solution of course not in this form as it is now. A lot would have to change before this thing would be possible.
No god please no!
No….and by the way….it is not democratic as it is today.
Most people won’t go for this. The EU can become more social without becoming a republic. An EU Republic will just take away EU member country’s government powers and leave them as admin for the one EU government making EU member countries easier to control. However the people cannot be controlled and this would likely trigger an EU-wide revolution and disintigrate the very EU that is attempted to be controlled.
NO. The EEC or the Common Market plus the Schengen Treaty &Convention was the best form. Economic integration without a political one.
I would support a federation of democratic states like Canada, USA, Germany and others, not necessarily a republic.
Yes, Slightly of topic, Why does an EU Republic require a Prime Minister? President and Prime Minister are a dated concept even at national level, in a true democracy, you need more than one persons to make a decisions relating to policies. A Parliament or Congress type system is a better option, with equal representative for each member state, voting and making alliance on issues. Lastly, Nationalism in the same bracket as racism, is bad for this day and age.
As a citizen of the United Kingdom I have spent all my life as a member of what is now the EU. I am so determined not to leave the European project that I intend to take the nationality of an EU state and move there. I would love to see the EU extend towards greater political, economic and fiscal unity–this would be the fulfilment of the way I (and many others) have always understood myself to be European first and foremost, before having any other identity. I would like there to be a formal European citizenship and I would be prepared to pay common European taxes to sustain our rights over the whole of the EU. There should also be a role for common European laws. We face much uncertainty in relation to Russia, the US and China, and history suggests that joining together will make us stronger. We share so much of our culture and past, and similar goals of respect, tolerance, peace, and health. Roll on that EU passport.