Can the EU be a Superpower? - Kings and Generals Modern DOCUMENTARY

[@KingsandGenerals]

Install War Planet Online for FREE here ✅wpo.page.link/Kings and choose your favorite new lieutenant! Thank you to Gameloft for sponsoring the video.

[@alfrancisbuada2591]

Hello, do the history of the Phillippines next please. Especially, The Philippine-American War.

[@zddxddyddw]

Pleeeaaaase I beg youuu, make videos on Latin American history, on the region's wars and important events. You keep doing European and US history that has been done over and over again by countless channels. Latin American history is barely discussed and is full of interesting and epic events that aren't told by any English media.

[@tedcrilly46]

@@zddxddyddw Apocalypto covers most of it.

[@RomMLT]

Very nice video !

[@zddxddyddw]

@@tedcrilly46 You wish.

[@Daffmeister187]

Watching this as a Norwegian is funny when you remember "Oh yeah... we're not in the EU, this is not about us." halfway through the video.

[@boilingatoms5212]

My thoughts exactly ^^

[@LiquidfirePUA]

We still love you guys regardless...now give us gas 😂😂😂😂

[@brodozer2515]

haha ikke sant xD

[@cobbler9113]

I have to admit, since leaving the EU it is rather fascinating to see how the EU will change and evolve from the sidelines. I’m still glad we’re out but hope for good relations.

[@uninstaller2860]

Soon... ;)

[@Luthies]

Have to say the title of this video is quite misleading. I was expecting a video exploring the political and regulatory influence the EU has in the world, not a theorizing video about potential Federal EU. Still enjoyed it even though I got a different video than I was expecting :D

[@victorvanpelt]

Yes i had exactly the same thought. The EU is currently more a regulatory power.

[@yojasmagic]

A lot of the video can be quite misleading. To take an obvious example, the point about how the EU hasn't yet 'enforced' its currency in certain member states... what's with that phrasing? Edit: watched the entire video now and it ends on a call for further integration. The phrasing seems like you're deliberately obfuscating the issues with EU integration. EU's great and all but now it just feels like political propaganda. At least handle current issues in a fair way. I'd expected better.

[@charles7866-o1l]

Yeah, man. The title asks if it's a superpower but the video is about what it could be.

[@fortnajt]

I was expecting something else also. I would have loved to see how a centralized European defense budget would invest in the security of the EU. What would be its most important sector of the defense. What some numbers would look like. Also which areas of the defense would be streamlined and made more efficient. The impact on EUs neighbors and areas of influence. Things like that. But I liked this video too

[@jefferyb2253]

Agreed! It was disappointing

[@matteoacquarelli3660]

my main issue is that the question "can X be a superpower" is never followed by "what is a superpower". Citing Lebovic (2008), and Brooks & Wohlfort (2014) would have been a start, since power projection is commonly seen as a basic requirement. Not easy, mind you, as I'm trying to do just that in a paper. But you can't simply sum elements of national power and call it a day - nor can you disregard hard power.

[@TheRezro]

Superpower is defined as country what can influence wole world and has strength to back it up. Great Powers have own zones of influences (so called Multi-Polar World), regional powers can impact own direct neighbours. And United States is conventional Superpower with all traits of it. Only two forces what can challenge US, are China and in fact EU. Though neither of them have expeditionary major forces to challenge US on the sea. Still US also can't invade them and they also have lot of soft power. There is also few Great Powers like UK (including Canada and Australia), France, Japan, South Korea or India. Who can push they influence outside near neighborhood. The case of Russia is unclear. Russia only have reputation of Superpower from time of Cold War. But that is it. They do not have strength to actually back it up. U would still say that they are Great Power. But declining. Currently Russia struggle to even hold local influence. After they disintegrate own military, they may not be even that.

[@Unammedacc]

There is several ways of determining what is a super power. I must admit the video lacks this information and evaluation. It is just a list of national elements of power for the EU. But I must admit that evaluating the aptitude of the EU to fullfill this prerequisites is quite hard because of it's internal structure. And the video makes a good job sumarizing thoose issues. Now on the topic of hard power, I'll use France for example because I know quite well military issues of my own country. A EU defense force is completely impossible in the current situation for the french parliament because absolutely NO country in Europe wants to abandon to another country any elements of military sovereignty (there is a strong morale obstacle for that : how would the french population accept, for exemple, that we send our comando-marine special force to death in a foreign country to protect polish, swedish, or hungarian citizens and no french ones ? Doing so would be very generous, very human, very chivalrous and stuff, but would the family and relatives of the soldiers sent there doing so accept it the same way ? And if so, for how long ?). For exemple, France is the only EU country able to project power over the globe (it's among the world top 3 with the US (which are three galaxies ahead) and the british). And even if you imagine building this power from scratch, France is the country in Europe that would contribute to it way more than any other : it's the only EU country that have meaningfull aircraft carriers (not talking of springboard boats here) and the means to build new ones. It's the only country in Europe that has meaningfull naval industry, a military tradition centered around projecting power, and military bases abroad to support thoose deployments. It's also the only EU power to have the atomic bomb. Yet, the French does not want to federalize the military with other EU country because that would mean that sending their boys abroad would be under the sovereignty of the EU parliament. And the political scene in France is not ready at all to abandon this key element of sovereignty to other countries that has no tradition in the matter. On the other hand, the EU has already shown that they can't cope with the french defense policy. Perun made a great video about french military doctrine in terms of strategy and defense budget, and notably the National Armament Agency (the DGA) in France, which is a structure that does not exist in any other democracy in europe. The DGA has no links with the political world, and the political world cannot study the armament budget in France. They can just vote it and say "Hay" or "Ney". It's not something that happens in other european countries. And yet, it is one of the reason why in France, despite a small military budget, the military is so competent. It always has what it requires, and the politics have nearly no words in that spendings. This is not acceptable for many democracies, but acceptable for the french ... And France is (if not the first, because we must take care of the poles, the greeks or the swedish for exemple, in terms of territorial defense, which are much stronger than France) among the top 3 military power in the EU. But there is also the atomic bomb which is an issue. France is the only EU military power with atomic power. Yet, the stockpiles of atomic bombs in France are enough to defend France sovereignty, but not European sovereignty. This means that the EU is a dwarf in terms of atomic armament, and many european countries know this very well. This is why they rather rely on US support and alliance than rely on a united european defense alliance or structure. In case of a stand-off between the EU and any other country that has atomic power in the world, the US will always be a better protection than the EU. For thoose reason, the EU is not, cannot, and never will be a military power on it's own, as long as it has not solved them (and I don't see any desirable or satisfying way of solving them in the near future. But that's personnal judgement). The EU has NO real hard power in any other continent than it's own. This is why it rely so heavily on it's soft power, which is way more powerful in terms of cultural and economic influence. Moreover, the creation or emergence of a EU centered hard power also require to study the views and interests of the United States in present days european defense system. But that's another debate :).

[@tedcrilly46]

@@Unammedacc coalition.

[@Unammedacc]

@@tedcrilly46 A coalition is always temporary. It's unity is always built around similar tactical and operational objectives. It can't handle long term theater scale strategical objectives. Coalitions are already a thing on thoose matters. But they are built by the addition of the military might of their members. They don't solve any of the previously mentioned issues.

[@tedcrilly46]

@@Unammedacc nato is a coalition.

[@Nasir3623]

From an insiders perspective, the EU is a lot less the United States of Europe and more of a confederation of European nation states. The system requires a lot of compromises for it to work and not fall apart. France wants the EU to be a military geopolitical power that can rival both the US and China but other countries like Denmark, which didn’t have an imperialistic legacy, don’t share France’s militaristic vision.

[@dalirfarzan1694]

Don't think the EU can depend on the USA to defend them if they're ever attacked in perpetuity. They're going to need some type of military because the US isn't always going to be there like a big brother.

[@mormacil]

I would argue that Eastern Europe even without imperialistic heritage is very much in favor of this because of their experiences living next to imperial legacies. It's true there is no unified vision on the future of the EU but to paint the desire to have a European army as just the dream of former imperial powers is completely detached from reality.

[@MDP1702]

@@mormacil The problem is that while eastern EU countries are in favour of a strong defense policy, they are currently against an EU army because they fear it would disrupt NATO or even cause it to disband, which I personally don't find very logical.

[@Zait2009]

@@mormacil It is highly unlikely that Eastern Europeans will accept any "One country" model. It's not only about Russia, we got NATO for that, but also the experiences of those who worked abroard then came back with terrible stories of how Western Europe looks like from a cultural perspective. Those who came back have the view that the West is good to make money and then come back to the safer East.

[@garethhahahah2037]

@@dalirfarzan1694 USA is part of NATO, so they have obligation to come and help as they have obligation to help the USA. NATO have 31 members now and 29 of them are in Europe. Finland alone has a wartime military strength of 280,000. With 700 howitzers, 700 heavy mortars, 100 MLS. It also have 64 F35's on order. Poland has 122,500 active personnel at this time and that number set to go up. Just in partnership with south Korea the Polish are getting 1000 new tanks, 648 self propelled howitzer and the list go on. They are also building 1400 IFV's themselves. With out the USA NATO still has 2million active and 1million reservist. 8,000 tanks, 8,000 artillery, 2,000 combat aircraft, 250 warships. Yes that has Canada counted in it as well, but still huge numbers.

[@zaros1781]

The funny contradiction that we have in Europe is that people quickly get spooked by 'European Federation/superpower' or 'giving up sovereignty'. But pretty much everybody wants more cooperation > more integration between European countries.

[@DarkZerol]

Europe should unite to become it's own superpower or cease to become relevant or exist. The fact is no single European state or country can hope to match the economical, political or military power of nations like the US, China or worst yet, Russia. It's really just a matter of time before another superpower comes along and force their own authority upon any one or all EU members.

[@orsotoro2011]

Also, be aware that the EU is now looking to abolish the national veto, so that a majority vote by members will then be sufficient to change their policies, rather than an unanimous vote at present.

[@quintiax]

Finally rectifying what the Treaty of Lisbon failed to do.

[@Paisa231]

Good

[@simonbourdin2952]

No it isn't, this is Euroskeptic disinformation. Some member states (Germany in particular) have suggested abolishing the national veto; the EU has made no moves towards any such decision, and is unlikely to ever do so, for the simple reason that any proposal to abolish the national veto... would need to get through the national veto.

[@phonepoies]

Absolutely necessary

[@jlvfr]

Should go easier, now that the UK is out.

[@aayushdasgupta]

Well, well, well. This was the research question of my 12th grade school project, which was on the EU. And our project group came to the conclusion that EU is more like a 'civilian power' than a 'military power', and hence can't really be called a superpower in a conventional sense. It is really influential in economic matters and soft power in general, but lacking behind in military matters which can be resolved if the EU functioned more like a proper state than a regional organisation. Man, this is bringing back memories of late night discussions on our project file.

[@phonepoies]

The EU wants to be fully civilian. But it cannot be if it's neighbours don't let it be that.

[@aayushdasgupta]

@@phonepoies That's right. The 'resolution' is merely hypothetical, and we also noted that being a 'civilian power' is better for the EU.

[@julianshepherd2038]

Because NATO is subsidised by the US. They stop paying and Europe will lose interest.

[@50shekels]

@@aayushdasgupta That project must've either failed or whatever backwards caveman land you originate from have no understanding of geopolitics or the instruments that a state apparatus possesses

[@briancops3798]

It mostly depends on the will of the politicians. If national leaders would have taken responsibility and kept European armies in a proper state, the EU would have had the military power. Economically it isn't as strong as it seems as it completely depends on imports in crucial areas and it keeps depending on some countries instead of diversifying. The EU is a giant on extremely shaky foundations. the only strong point of the EU is its Soft power.

[@raulpetrascu2696]

It's interesting you say that the existence of the EU too was unimaginable. This seems to be the biggest recurring theme when it comes to the formation of states: Germany a united state? Preposterous! All the different Greek states coming together as 1 nation? Impossible! They're so culturally different, they hate eachother etc etc. Based on the pattern all a European (Con)Federation would need is an external enemy, and a Bismarck/Phillip/Cavour,Mazzini,Garibaldi figure (or Aethelstan to go really far back). Obviously European countries are more similar to eachother than to say China and by stressing that rather than differences is how these nations came to be. But probably requires a high pressure situation / war to forget the obstacles and inconveniences and push them together (starting with a loose confederation etc)

[@Alejojojo6]

I couldnt have said it better myself. You realised this is the case when you move to countries like China or Japan and you see how similar you are to you European bretheren.

[@50shekels]

“New opinions are always suspected, and usually opposed, without any other reason but because they are not already common.” - John Locke

[@detectiveharris8772]

Anything is possible if given enough effort

[@jakubzov]

​@@kennethadler7380debatable at best. The German language wasn't unified for a long time and some dialects weren't understandable for most German speakers. Same with Greek, we know there were multiple vastly different dialects.

[@nikiindzhiev5369]

@@kennethadler7380 what a bunch of nonsense lol and 8 morons agree with you

[@catalyst772]

At this point might as well just restore the Roman Empire

[@randomuruk7230]

Awesome

[@jakubzov]

Based

[@crokette8908]

I like to think that an EU federation wouldn't rely on slavery and pillaging the neighbors, unlike the Romans.

[@AkselGAL]

Naaa... emperors have proven to be a faulty gouverment system. Unifying more and more, as willing, compromising, equal and free citizens, far better.

[@feanor7481]

"Europe is too big to be united, but too small to be divided - its dual destiny is here ..." - Daniel Faucher

[@50shekels]

who the fuck is Daniel Faucher

[@Siranoxz]

EU was never meant to expand towards the east as it was primarily a western economic alliance. And here we are EU expanding towards the eastern part in subpar speeds until it reaches Russia.

[@maghambor]

Big thinkers have been mistaken before. A lot of people could see, and are seeing, the benefits of interrogation right now. The Scandinavians can align their defense policies, the Southern's can continue to excel at launching strategic assets. France is finding its new role while Germany is rearming, finally. In a proper union, a federation, these efforts would automatically align.

[@jesseverkaik7671]

@@Siranoxz You make it sound like the EU is marching towards Russia, even though it's the countries bordering Russia pretty much begging on their knees to be allowed in.

[@Ruben-by4oy]

As an Armenian I would say the majority of our country wants to join the EU right now. We have done a lot for that. Corruption is low, democracy and free speech level is high, even higher than in some EU countries.

[@notnaanton630]

Yes it is, but the economy is still to weak :/

[@johanahrne5050]

Mafia money laundering is your countries only business

[@AmirZarif47]

Why/how does Armenia count itself part of Europe?

[@mathieumaticien]

The same way Georgia does?

[@maghambor]

I would welcome you. Just get your house in order and your country will have a future as European nation. I think you'd do fine. And it would stabilize your country.

[@Istorian]

While the video is well-made, I really don't understand the confidence of the narrator at some points. Especially towards the end, it felt a lot like pro-EU propaganda about how the EU will be a pillar of stability for all states etc. As a Greek, the EU has been the main reason behind my people's economic misfortunes and most Greeks (in fact the people of most "smaller" countries) do not feel as if their needs and priorities are addressed by the EU.

[@Istorian]

@@arnold3768 You clearly have no idea of what happened (and continues to happen) in Greece. I would not make such a claim if there wasn't substantial evidence of this. In fact, I am not the only one making this claim, it is backed by the majority of the academic community in economics. It is futile to try and debate with you over KZbin comments, but I will just state that I actually teach economics in the US, with a focus on the financial crisis of 2008, so I will warmly encourage you to try and educate yourself on this matter via reading some textbooks and/or watching some videos. If you want any recommendations, just let me know. :)

[@lukaszwojtowicz1981]

No one forced Greeks to spend more money then they have had. Greeks did this to themselves taking a lot of loans (state and private) which they couldn't pay back.

[@Istorian]

@@lukaszwojtowicz1981 Before the crisis Greece was in deep financial trouble that was partly the previous governments' fault, yes. However, after the crisis, the memoranda that were put in place were not aiming to bring sustainability back to Greece but instead to maximize profit for the bankers of the UK and Switzerland who saw this situation as an opportunity instead of a crisis. It is very short sighted to only blame Greece for what happened, as it only explains the situation up to 2009 and not afterwards, and not even the full story there.

[@lukaszwojtowicz1981]

@@Istorian After crysis Greece had too options. Bankruptcy or paying off debts. The only way to pay debts was to get money from somewhere. Money came from the EU. The only condition was to bring back responsible economic policies. It means no more spending money like crazy and taking loans whenever it was possible. That's all. I know that they would love to get money and live like nothing happened. But in that case no-one would borrow them money. 🤷

[@Istorian]

@@lukaszwojtowicz1981 Unfortunately you seem to be highly mistaken on the matter. Nobody wanted to keep living like nothing happened, and keep in mind that when the Greek government lied about its finances it also lied to the people as well, not just the EU. The part where you're mistaken though is where you say that the only conditions set out by the EU were to have responsible financial policies. That's flat out wrong. If you read the memoranda (I have, it's part of my job), and have any basic education in macroeconomics, you will quickly realize that the policies required to be implemented were not there to guarantee sustainability but to ensure that Greece remains financially dependent on the EU for political leverage, while maximizing the profit of the loaners, and the plan worked to perfection for those who drafted it. In fact, perhaps the most striking thing is that policies like the ones required by the memoranda were previously considered unimaginable and too ludicrous to be implemented in any country, by the academic community. If such policies were implemented for example in Germany or France in a similar situation, the EU would be a shell of what it is now.

[@Dendarang]

A better question is: would the EU want to be a superpower? Being a superpower is a massive pain in the ass and it means being drawn into endless conflicts and crises the world over and it means constantly dealing with all the events of the entire world. I think a much better idea for the EU is to focus on strategic and economic autonomy, building up its own military strength to the point where it can credibly defend all its borders, its own economy to the point where it's mostly self sufficient in key respects and its own navy to the point where it can control its own marginal seas chiefly Mediterranean. An EU that's wealthy, independent, secure, federal and at the forefront of technological development is what I want to see, not necessarily an EU that has its fingers in every pie in the world.

[@AkselGAL]

Agree with you mostly. A militarily superpower? No! Our past is full of conflict and our present shows "better together" is enriching us on all levels. I disagree on defense. Even without NATO, no nation except the USA or nuclear strikes could bring the EU down. USA is so heavily interdependant with Europe, any conflict would be economical suicide for both sides. Russia is loosing against Ukraine. Now imagine an invasion of Poland, who really have no desire to become russian subjects. Polish citizens would "welcome" russian troops same way as the ukranian citizens. Meanwhile Poland getting troops from all its european allies and Russia getting counterattacked on a boarder of thousands of thousands kilometres. And in contrary to Ukraine, the EU nations are heavily invested in air power.

[@solanaprot8400]

Stupid point of view

[@neuralnetwork17]

The European Union already has its fingers in every pie in the world. Every power, great and small, is constantly dealing with events all over the world to maintain and increase that power. More power just means that you have a greater ability to actively shape those events. It sounds like you assume being a "superpower" implies doing what the US does. They are not "drawn into endless conflicts." They invaded Grenada because their banana exports competed with Chiquita, for f-'s sake. It's completely avoidable.

[@chozer1]

@@AkselGAL europe can become the greatest millitary in the world if we wanted to. we hold the most experience when it comes to that. and this time no attacking eachother for it though

[@chadsknnr]

EU as a superpower is inevitable, at least as an attempt. In terms of longterm planning, it makes sense; why else would they form it in the first place?

[@PrimeroVorian1]

thank you

[@MajinOthinus]

Interestingly, the German Empire would serve as an almost ideal template for European integration. All that really would need to change are three things: 1. There would need to be majority rule (as opposed to unanimity) in the Council of the EU and hey, we're almost there already 2. There would need to be a common command structure and leader *during war time.* Something that should be doable, considering NATO is most of the way there already. 3. A slight prevalence for EU foreign policy over national one. Probably the most difficult, but certainly achieveable. Other than that, we're basically already there. Legally speaking at least. The only current caveat being the ability of member states to leave; which would mostly not impact decision making.

[@MajinOthinus]

@@crusty5059 That's called democracy and applies to any vote.

[@MajinOthinus]

@@crusty5059 This applies to any kind of democracy, direct or not. It is the democracy part it is inherent to.

[@blackhole3298]

@@crusty5059 How about each country has the same amount of votes in one chamber, and the second less powerful chamber is proportional to people?

[@h.k.347]

thansk for this one! well made, as all your vids.

[@LoneWanderer727]

"members of a theoretical federal state could leave the organization, or change their relationship at anytime" United States: "that's actually against the rules"

[@LackofFaithify]

Yup. That's a paddling.

[@sethledford9612]

Well by that point the US was no longer a Loose Federation. Also, gotta paddle them slavers.

[@marcusmagni]

It depends on the rules of the federal state

[@abobanger9054]

In a lose-federation The US is no lose-federation

[@АкмалАминов-э5ц]

The bell button was pressed Mr. Brown

[@sfp2290]

As a Dane, I would give a European Federation a hard pass. Working together with your neighbour is a completely differently level, than sharing homes.

[@alexanderrose1556]

As a Dane i would sign up for the European Fedaration immediatly Working together is not the same as sharing homes and the only way our small irrelevant state can handle the big challenges of the world of tomorrow is to be part of something larger.

[@blackhole3298]

Maybe you need the same treatment as Britain to see what is means to be isolated in Europe. Completely only Denmark. Just think about, how you feel to go against Germany or France or even Netherlands. That is what you are doing to europeans against China and Russia and soon India

[@alexanderrose1556]

@@blackhole3298just to clarify this dude is in the minority when it comes to support for our EU memebership, most danes are very supportive especcialy after the brexit disaster.

[@sfp2290]

@@alexanderrose1556 I believe I must clarifiy my statement, as it seems to have been misunderstood twice in a row, based on your responses. I am not against working together with the other EU countries. Heck, if it was up to me, I would unite all of Scandinavia into one country (if not all the Nordic countries if possible). I am just not in favor of going all in, as it seems like the most extreme solution, to a problem, which I believe can be handled with much less. And while you are right, that the majority of the Danes are positive in their attitude towards the EU. That does not mean, that they are willing to go all-in. Just like the majority wants animals to give good lives. But the majority is not about to go so far, as to become vegans.

[@blackhole3298]

@@sfp2290 Well, you had an opt out against an EU army as well as the euro (probably have). Your minister not so long ago vowed to do everything against an EU army that was proposed by Macron. The Danish population directly went against the foreign policy of 60 million French people. You had an opt out from the beginning and everything that would have been decided would have not applied to you anyways. You see the problem of the big countries? These were always the countries that made Europe powerful and we continue to live of our old empires status that is diminishing everyday. There is currently the believe that every European people deserves a good life and peace, but that will quickly change if it would require the old European powers to be completely destroyed. Britain, Germany, France, Italy and Spain had to give in to alot of the demands of the smaller nations who are in my opinion, in part completely unfit to have any say in Europe because they never had to defend Europe and just give a shit about its bigger brothers. You can only achieve solidarity between the big nations if, the big nations sponsor and leverage the power of the smaller states, but in return the smaller states must back at least foreign policy of Europe. Otherwise the big states will end the single market rather quickly. If you are a big nationality you might as well call it the period of humiliation after the last empires got dissolved. You know the answer to that if you know history, or watch China today

[@cosminivan9927]

There already exists a pan-european party with some succes in many counties. They have an MEP (from Germany), MPs in the Dutch parliament and the Bulgarian one, and many other members in local and municipal councils, the name of the party is Volt and considering that the video was about European Federalization, one of their key policies, I think it is relevant to mention them

[@shogunego1187]

Stars on flags are op

[@whzbwkkfu]

Man, northern Jutland in Denmark looks a bit flooded here! Thanks for all your great videos.

[@ralambosontiavina7372]

Great work !

[@Varangoi]

When the music kicked in at 9:50 i expected to hear the voice of Shirvan from Caspian Report.

[@EV02EV01EV00]

Kings and generals is overall pretty objective id say. Tries to cover a lot of things from neutral point of view. Caspian report is informative but listen with a pinch of salt as it is sometimes highly biased.

[@Densdens381]

​@@EV02EV01EV00funny how I would have said the exact contrary! 😅 I guess the lesson is "take everyone With a grain of salt"

[@lordz00]

Caspian report smells of russbots

[@EV02EV01EV00]

@@lordz00 And Erdolf bots too

[@IsmaGF85]

I am a massive supporter of the EU, despite its many flaws, and I'd endorse progressing the union into a Federation. Specially if we take into consideration what happened to the Holy Roman Empire, which stood "half way through" for too long and eventually collapsed, which is exactly what the EU has been doing since the Treaty of Lisbon. However, I don't think we Europeans understand one basic element of this equation: Germany, the UK, France, Spain, Poland... Some of us haven't been relevant superpowers for centuries. None of us are anymore. Our flags, our economies, our military... they're just a weak heirloom from the past and we don't stand a chance if we want a seat at the modern table, on our own. Alas, we don't get it, the same way the Hellenic city states failed to do so as well.

[@dr.j5642]

France would never fully get on board with a Federal EU, of course unless they were in the driver's seat, then maybe. More or less the same for Germany. Those two would be vying for the emperor's seat, if it were to even be a consideration.

[@zjeee]

France is the nation that has been pushing for a EU military the most. And yes they want to be in the driver’s seat of course.

[@AkselGAL]

There were times in which any cooperation with Germany would have called treason... Time and people change. Yea, we have this 15-30% of nationalistic idiots all arround. But at the end, people in Europe are very similiar in attitudes, goals, view of the world.

[@dr.j5642]

@@AkselGAL not really. French and Germans still view things very differently. The English viewed things so differently they left the EU entirely. There's no guarantee the EU even survives the coming transition. The EU put all of their eggs into Russia's basket, and it is now apparent that decision was a fatal flaw of EU policy making for past two decades at least. The question of how the German and wider European industrial base will cope without *necessary* raw materials and energy from Russia is left completely unanswered. As it's becoming apparent China is supplying arms to Russia, China will also face trade bans. How will the EU cope with losing raw materials and energy from Russia, while simultaneously losing Chinese consumption and cheap manufacturing is a near existential crisis for the EU. The US being energy independent, and not relying much on exports to China, doesn't face the challenges Europe is now facing down. We are currently decentralizing manufacturing out of China as well, much of it likely going to Mexico in the next decade or so (as Mexican labor is 30% the cost of Chinese labor, and is of higher quality). Europe doesn't have nearly as good options in comparison. We will see how the EU weathers the coming crisis, to see if a stronger union is even possible within the European landscape.

[@dr.j5642]

@@the11382 the British smartly saw that the EU in it's current form is a crisis away from dissolution. Serious reforms are now necessary for the EU to even survive the coming decades. Putting all of the EU's eggs in Russia's basket of energy and raw materials was a fatal flaw in their policy making over the past decades. The English saw the nonsense and decided to hitch their wagon to the US economy, rather than a EU economy that was destined to tank after the Russian system was cut off from the world trade system.

[@niemand1072]

​@@the11382same with the dutch ahahab

[@hungrymusicwolf]

"The founding fathers of the EU proved that the common good of the people of Europe is more important than any national interest." - The issue is whose common interest? Because making Greek suffer for say the Netherlands is not a fair deal. The common good only matters when it is good for all, which is rarely the case.

[@noodlyappendage6729]

100% this was a pro-EU propaganda piece.

[@staC-wh6ik]

Greek politicians brought that to themselves

[@akhsdenlew1861]

@@staC-wh6ik The EU helped a lot.. don't worry. it's easy to blame the country and miss the whole picture here. it's obvious that the EU's interest lies North... The south will suffer for the north to flourish.

[@pedrozepeda6930]

Great video

[@BogumiłaSracz]

Where can I find bibliography for the video essay?

[@Oba936]

4:43 small eu-nerd-fix: "The Head of State *and* Government" i.e. The King of the Netherlands is the Head of State of the Netherlands but has no seat in the European Council. The Prime Minister of the Netherlands, as the Head of Government, does. The Member States actually decide themselves who they send. In theory nothing would stop them to send their actual Head of State for Symbolic gatherings. But that has not happened as of yet. I for myself would really love the actual Heads of State to be meeting for symbolic events. For example when the Council choses the Commission President (defacto Prime Minister of the EU) or when welcoming a new Memberstate.

[@calebbearup4282]

I still don't understand how Europe hasn't forced Turkey to stop the illegal occupation of Cyprus

[@s.p9638]

because it is not entirely illegal. Cyprus was leased to British empire by the Ottomans and the island was invaded by Britain when the two got in war so there was a big hustle when the time for decolonization came. Turks wanted it partitioned and Greeks demanded union with Greece which gave the British the genius idea of creating a multiethnic state in the island that would be guaranteed by Turkey, Greece and Britain. Greek nationalists on the island were not happy since they thought the deal gave too much power to Turkish minority(aprox %20 of the population) and they organized a coup installing religious fanatics and starting the process for union with Greece. Turkey invaded later due to interethnic violence in the island which disproportionately affected the Turkish minority and here we are today. I mean Turks already wanted to partition the island but they did not have a casus belli until ultra religious nationalist ogres gave them one with massacring Turkish civilians. Britain could have stopped it all but did not do so and Cyprus would not even be a country today if Turkey did not invade since it would have become a province of Greece. It is not like your main stream news outlets give proper information and background when they tell a story you know...

[@akhsdenlew1861]

Mainly cus EU is all talk and no actions. All EU knows, is to say "we condemn this".. and then do nothing about it.

[@Aeterna71]

​@@s.p9638thanks for spreading truth

[@isalutfi]

Hello, am 'new subcriber'. Save first, and then listen to. Thank you for sharing this insightful content.

[@shanecle]

EU states have demographic problems that will become unignorable in the coming decades. Demographics is everything and is way more important than some hypothetical federation.

[@thesecondsilvereich7828]

Europe for Europeans

[@larspeterthomsen9798]

Gotta love that Denmark-Germany border on your map.

[@boxinghistory82]

Unity all the way ! Stronger together !

[@-RONNIE]

Thanks for the video

[@chrisd997]

Cyprus should included in the maps. Very interesting video

[@issamkholoud2009]

Cyprus is not in Europe, a little bit hard to put it in a map. Cue argument saying it is.

[@chrisd997]

@@issamkholoud2009 you should check the title , EU 😂😂😂😂

[@issamkholoud2009]

@@chrisd997 then the video maker should include the French and Dutch parts of the eu in South America and the Caribbean, gets a little silly now doesn’t it. After all EU is in the title.

[@chrisd997]

@@issamkholoud2009 fair point given also the superpower title and the potential impact of overseas territories

[@donatkovacs1912]

What about Turkey as a candidate for EU membership? Why didn't you mention that? I think in the long run it will be an inevitable debate.

[@greatwolf5372]

No one in Europe wants Turkey to join

[@jehandesains8674]

As long as Turkey is ruled by a dictator and enforces islamic extremism, it has no chance in joining. A secular, progressive Turkey, which respects the autonomy of the Kurds and Armenians, and has democracy and respects human rights, then we can talk.

[@akhsdenlew1861]

@@jehandesains8674 ah yes.. in 200 years maybe.

[@MerryXmasMfkrs]

Not until Atatürk's vision comes true.

[@Playernumbernull]

I think the idea of whether or not one is comfortable with a European federation depends on how comfortable one is with giving away power to foreign politicians and bureaucrats that one didn't vote for, and thus can't hold accountable. A federalized and more centralized EU would be a democratic disaster for Europe.

[@MDP1702]

People also give power away to politicians in different regions of their country without being able to vote for them, that isn't really different to giving it away to politicians from another country/region in the (con)federation imo.

[@noodlyappendage6729]

@@MDP1702of course it’s different. It’s different because we have allegiance to our own countries. We don’t have allegiance to the EU.

[@lukabozic5]

@@noodlyappendage6729 If EU is a country then by default your country is EU, you just countered yourself

[@zjeee]

MDP, I disagree. It’s not the same, politicians in different regions and counties can only make regional/local decisions so it doesn’t matter to people in other regions. You cannot compare that to bodies of government that makes national decisions. Totally different.

[@MDP1702]

@@noodlyappendage6729 Why do you have allegiance to your country? They are as much a construct as the EU, just an older. In the past everyone had allegiance to a smaller region than the countries now. Personally I have just as much allegiance to the EU as my country/region. I see no really reason why I shouldn't.

[@Rob_F8F]

Is the word "unilateral" being used when the word "unanimous" is intended?

[@18Krieger]

I like the idea of a closer EU. It would also be good if teh EU would be less dependent on the USA and would form more of a counter weight.

[@uninstaller2860]

Yeah it's embarrassing how there is a war in Europe and the USA has to yet again carry our continent

[@majesticfool]

you know the USA practically protected all of europe since ww2?

[@lukaszwojtowicz1981]

@@majesticfool Nope, the USA protected their own interests in Europe since ww2.

[@majesticfool]

@@lukaszwojtowicz1981 what were they?

[@iamlegq]

@@majesticfool is not something against the US, the US would always remain allies and friends, but certainly European and American interests in the 21st century aren't always aligned. A strong independent EU would serve as an ally to the US while also allowing Europeans to take their interests deeper into consideration first (as Americans already do). Is about creating an entity that can work and collaborate with the US as equals, which is not currently the case.

[@marcello7781]

I really hope to see a Federal European Union, at least to see European countries cooperating in a more coordinated way when it comes to foreign policy and dealing with superpowers like the US and China.

[@zjeee]

I prefer the EU to stay as the way it was intended. An economic union. Not really fond of the idea to hand over the reigns of my nation to unelected bureaucrats in Brussels.

[@greenwizard7572]

​@@zjeeewell we of course would need a different kind of democratic government like a president who is actually elected unline now

[@jakubzov]

​@@zjeeethe solution is to get rid of the council and commission. With that you are left with a fully democratic parliament.

[@gimzod76]

The EU exists to be the US vassal state

[@a0flj0]

​@@zjeee European commissioners are designated by member states and voted into power by the European Parliament, just like national governments are formed. The parliament is fully and directly elected. The council is formed of the heads of state, which are either elected or voted for by the national parliaments, which are themselves elected. What exactly do you mean by unelected bureaucrats? Do you consider your national government to be unelected bureaucrats? All EU officials which are in a position of authority are either directly elected or as accountable in front of directly elected representatives as your own government, and are not at all career bureaucrats, like a clerk of an administrative institution, hired, not voted for, either directly by the people or by another elected body, such as a national parliament. Unelected bureaucrats is a myth propagated by anti-EU actors, be they nationalistic parties in Europe or anti-democratic forces such as Russia or China. The EU is indeed a huge bureaucracy, and that's inevitable, very specifically because it has to carefully navigate a tight and narrow path between conflicting interests of member states, but it's not at all led by bureaucrats.

[@mortenrobinson5421]

It could be and it should be. Europe should be able to protect itself and handle it's own business without American aid. The EU should be able to guarantee security and grant nuclear status to all member countries.

[@tedcrilly46]

EU most certainly can protect itself. without the Americans. who is the threat? Russia can't beat Ukraine. Go check some stats. As for business, €17 trillion economy.

[@saus9870]

this won't happen we are already fed up with european influence. more autonomy not less.

[@julianshepherd2038]

That's not what people vote for but maybe you are in charge

[@steffensegoviahelbo5065]

as a Dane watching this was interesting yet horrifying. I hope the people and leaders of my country would have the courage to actually sit this one out. EU have done nothing good for democracy in my country in fact often democracy has been sidelined with the excuse of EU wanting it to happen. However there is one point this video doesn't take in to account. the fact that EU and the Nordic Union have members inside and outside of EU. members that have even more rights in all Nordic countries than any citizen of EU have in other countries of EU. and that status would have to be resolved with the agreement of all Nordic countries. as you cannot have a lose federal EU without strict external border control and without uniform citizen rights and status. and last but not least the cultural and language differences would simply be too big. when you have such big cultural differences we can look back in history how any unification went... either by force and eradication by the stronger culture, or eventually force, eradication and force full splitting by member nations not willing to pay the cost of their minorities to the greater good of those unions. regardless it is a civil war waiting to happen if it ever came to be. even if it might, or might not be successful for a few 100 years

[@lukaszwojtowicz1981]

Ignorance is talking here...

[@steffensegoviahelbo5065]

@@lukaszwojtowicz1981 yea you are right but why would you display your ignorance with so little value to add.?

[@lukaszwojtowicz1981]

@@steffensegoviahelbo5065 As every anti-EU person you are ignorant how EU works.

[@Konstantinos1648]

This is bs

[@HungaryBased]

As Hungarian, agree with you brother!

[@petioborisow150]

The fact that video surfaced means a lot

[@RenegadeVile]

Yes, but in a less conventional manner. Economically, technologically, diplomatically and culturally, the EU is a powerhouse. What I wish we did was cooperate more on a military level so we could defend ourselves instead of depending on the US to do it for us. It tethers us to them and their policies, which more often than not, contradict with the overal EU stance on a lot of issues. And it also makes us heavily dependent on who has the president hat overseas; something that also does not sit well with me.

[@RafaelSantos-pi8py]

Military cooperation in the EU risks blurring the lines that separate it from NATO. Besides, an european army wouldn't answer to elected national oficials but to unelected bureaucrats in Brussels. I don't like that one bit.

[@zjeee]

I am not sure man France is the nation that has been signaling its willingness to lead a united European army. Honestly I trust the US a lot more than I trust France. Besides our US alliance is a defensive alliance only and we have no obligation to follow them into a war unless we want to.

[@AkselGAL]

I have big trust that Liechtenstein, San Marino, Monaco, Andorra and Switzerland are incapable of conquering us! Russia? European Union + UK have enough nukes to put 8x nukes on every capital russian city. Conventional war? The Ukranian war would be a russian army summer holiday camp special in comparision to the military arsenal, monetary might, industrial capacity, population size thrown on them by the EU nations. And the polish and baltic people will not "welcome" the russians with flowers, only if the flower is glued to an ATGM. And a few days later all hell would break loose on the russians. Ukraine had neither nukes, nor significant airpower, big fleets, thousands of cruise missiles. China as an ally to Russia or keeping its economy intact? No brainer. Yea, we are not the USA as europeans.... but together, we are the most heavily armed region after them.

[@p_spyre]

@@RafaelSantos-pi8py These bureaucrats are answering to elected national officials, who elected them. So yes, they would and do answer to the people, maybe more indirectly, altough i do think we should have a more direct system, with a people elected parliament and a people elected commission.

[@empyrionin]

What you are saying is impossible since Germany is being held hostage by a clique of politicians who are sold to the Russians. There is no "German independent state" as of now. All decisions are run by Russia and occasionally the US, as has been since WW2. The German people have no intention to change this status quo out of existential dread - Germans consider that any gesture to elevate military independence will bring back Nazi sentiment. They prefer to be openly racist against for example Eastern Europeans and to dominate Europe economically. Until that changes, there will be no federated EU. We in the East do not wish to become subjects of this traitorous clique of German politicians. They will sell us out the first chance they get, while still claiming that they need to be the absolute leaders of EU policy in all domains.

[@AlexVictorianus]

Confederate States of Europe (CSE) :) the Bonnie Blue Flag 🇪🇺

[@Densdens381]

As a Frenchman, let me give you a contradictory inner view on the EU on the points you developed in your video. - I understand that from a North American point of view, a European federation must seem like a great idea but it is really not to many of us: we do not share the same history, culture, economical system, foreign interest, diplomatic relations with non-EU states with any other country in Europe. Only a very small minority of Europeans feel part of it rather than part of their own country. We just do not want to be part of the same state. - You stated that a united Europe should and would have to maintain amicable relations with the us because we share the same democratic values... Well I think we really do not. Once again, what interest do we share with the US? Some countries might need the American umbrella to protect them but here again, others do not. The French want to part from American foreign policy and we do not want to share our chair at the UN security council with other states. - The EU forces us to destroy our social state, give up our border and monetary sovereignty and makes us de facto vassals of the US. What good is there to keep it? My hope is that this European nightmare ends soon, hopefully with a Frexit. Now you might say that this is just a personal point of view but on the few occasions that the people were consulted on the EU matter like in 2005, we voted "no" to a further integration of UE states. (Oh! and by the way, what did the champion of democracy that is EU do? they just passed the same bill 3 years later without a vote).

[@mormacil]

70% of all EU citizens feel that they are European citizens opposed to just national citizens. That's not a small group but admittedly from 2020 so maybe things went even higher since then. France is part of a particularly Eurosceptic part of the memberstates. Not at the bottom of course but certainly lower than most. Only 27% say they don't want to be a European and would prefer only a national identity. Is there Euroscepticism? Sure but you got a solid ~20% of the average Western population that will always be nationalistic and thus always reject any form of unification. That's a stable percentage that remained constant as far back as the 50's. So having 27% rejecting it is entirely in the line of expectation as it's unrealistic to believe that everyone not nationalistic would be pro-EU. It just sounds like you're stuck in your echo chamber instead of looking at the actual statistics.

[@Densdens381]

@@mormacil hey there! You're absolutely right, my comment is not based on any statistics. My point was not that a majority of Europeans want to see it end. I was expressing an opinion shared by a significant part of French citizen. Would you mind sharing these data with me? I would be really interested in reading them. pS: Is that from the eurobarometer? Can we consider it an independent source? Not that I want to discuss the figure itself but the way the question is asked is of prime importance, especially when talking about a feeling.

[@Kiki67Cappi199]

That doesn’t mean they would be willing to give up their sovereignty lol

[@qarionlineeducation]

Amazing

[@tobias3125]

The fight for a federalised European Union is much older. It just started right after the prominent Speech of Schuman. A multinational coalition of young people created the UEF and started the European Movement. If you're under 30, you should check out about the Young European Federalists. You can find them in all Member and some non member states. They offer great opportunities to get involved and in touch in European politics. And it's a great way to get in touch with people all around europe :)

[@akhsdenlew1861]

a federal united europe.. Damn that sounds awfull.

[@miniaturejayhawk8702]

Only if it properly unites. As long as europe is this pseudo-confederation I see no hope when it comes to the superpower status.

[@theliato3809]

"Is the EU a superpower." Its a loose confederation without a formal military so i'd say no.

[@moustachio05]

But it could become one

[@welcometonebalia]

Thank you.

[@garethhahahah2037]

The problem you have is you have states with compete different outlooks on things. You have France that highly active in Africa with it military and then you have people like Germany, who hates spending money on their military and never want to use it. So who going to win out there? You have EU finding it almost impossible to agree on anything and handle everything bad because of it. If you are going to have one country, what national health care system will it have? Because France can't keep what they have now when people in Greece get a lot different. Is Finland, Germany and so on willing to eat Spain, Italy and Greece debt. That not even the tip of the problems they have to deal with. Also if EU forms a country then they only have one vote at the UN not 27. Texas in the USA don't get it own vote. Countries in Africa, Asia or America's will not be dealing with a country they might like and know, they will be dealing with a new country made up from people like and dislike with a lot of inner troubles going on in it.

[@4sakenreaper42]

Interesting video

[@davidblair9877]

As a U.S. citizen, I would love to see the E.U. emerge as a true third superpower with respect for human rights front and center in its constitution. The United States, in my opinion, has grown too used to being *the* democratic superpower of the world. It would do us some good to have an equal partner who could double-check our decisions and restrain our unilateral tendencies. In addition, our 2016-2020 adventure proved that the U.S. is not infallible. Authoritarianism can happen here, too. Europe should be able to set its own course and priorities should that happen, if it is to maintain its tradition of human rights and democracy. A future European Federation would need to rethink its military, though. Its ability to project force would need a particularly large upgrade, for at least two reasons: 1). Europe remains a net resource importer. While rich in certain crucial mineral resources, the European continent is, by geological luck, remarkably poor in others. Oil, gas, rare earths, cobalt, and many other energy-critical resources come to mind. Maintaining the flow of those resources is thus a national security issue. European sovereignty requires that Europe be able to protect those flows, and that may require force projection into regions which do produce those resources. 2). In a hypothetical WWIII (pray that it never happens), any power with the ability to project force will have an enormous advantage over a power which does not. It is always better and cheaper to fight a war on someone else’s territory than on your own. If you need proof, just look at Ukraine today. Without an ability to project force beyond its immediate neighborhood, Europe will always be in the position of receiving strikes rather than making them. That’s an unenviable position to be in.

[@Alejojojo6]

Well before the US was a democracy, it already existed in Europe (where it was born) so democracy has always been at core of European values and has always been a European thing. Greece, Iceland, the Cortes, the Carta Magna, the French Revolution, the Hansa, the Venetian Republic, etc... It was imported by Europeans to the American continent and it was them who created US after the values they had from Europe. So Europe was already projecting democratic values all the way across the planet since the very beginning. On the other hand, thinking the US is an actual democracy is a bit overstated since the presidents are always wealthy and always choosen from a duality party, this means that the lobbies and big corporations have A LOT of power in state affairs (Money is King in the US).. so much so they influence who is going to win and no matter who wins, little changes. US is an oligarchy of the wealthy desguised as a democracy. Triuth be told, a lot of countries are heading there too, including some of Europe. I do agree that Europe needs first, to distance itself a bit from the US an have deals of its own that benefit Europe but might not benefit the US. For example the US blocked EU-Iran negotiations because US and Iran hate each other but Europe and Iran were settling energy treaties already that benefited Europe but not the US. So this type of mingling from the Americans must be stopped while still keeping close ties with them. This leds to the second point. Europe needs to get it's own army to project it's power in case of attack on its interests. Our net resource importer was Russia, and Europe and Russia could have good relations if it wasnt controlled under Putin. But since it's not the case, Europe is currently (and has been for years) shifting to Electric cars, Solar pannel energy, wind energy and all sort of renewable energy source in order to become selfsufficient one day, anulling the power other countries might exerce in here. It's a mistake to think Europe is poor in natural resources. Scortland and specially Norway have oil and Gas, Sweden has the largest iron deposits in the world, etc... But millenia of exploitation has eroded a lot of them. Specially things like silver or gold.

[@Yaya-wi8pb]

The EU has nothing to do with Human Rights....JUST a NAZI , lipstick on a Pig...

[@maghambor]

Very good video.

[@milanlux03]

Go ahead for federation!

[@primitive_dancer]

Well done for the great work and the very informative video. It was really refreshing (and somehow a bit hopeful) to watch a video of your channel that is not focused on war. I hope you'll make more similar ones in the future.

[@Ch0ckl8]

What an odd title when you know perfectly well that it probably can't

[@andrijaobradovic3993]

As Serb i honestly hope we will never join EU, not the hate or anything, just don't want to be someone bootlicker

[@attilaabonyi8879]

No offence but isn't that what your governemnt is doing right now when it comes to russia?

[@shylywarrior3055]

Although the heads of state have to unanimously agree to the transfer of sovereignty, these heads of states often don't have the support of the majority of the electorate for such transfers of power. These heads of states often fail to ask permission to do so via referendum, because they know what the outcome will be.

[@TheSkyGuy77]

Its interesting how the EU seems to have imitated the USA in some ways and the UN in other ways.

[@aleshandsome3705]

Increase Crown Authority!!!

[@martinlye2748]

A interesting view of the EU to this Canadian.

[@nickdentonva7764]

Top work! 👌

[@Sir_Gerald_Nosehairs.]

No, as it can't project military power in any way, and is utterly dependent on the nuclear protection of two non-EU states; the US and UK. Its future will depend on how it handles the migrant crisis, as the natives are not going to accept mass immigration from Africa and the Middle East continuing, as it being proven quite clearly. Yet a humane way of solving it is not yet obvious.

[@mormacil]

You mean France?

[@katieee4915]

France has nukes

[@hungrymusicwolf]

Ah yes, the EU has always had the choice to have a nuclear arsenal. The only reason why most countries didn't is because nobody wanted more nuclear proliferation, as that increases the risk of nuclear war. Also, even right now as others pointed out France has a nuclear arsenal.

[@staC-wh6ik]

Mass migration will still be a thing as long as climate change isn't contrasted and as long as corrupt leaders are held in position in those poor countries in order to preserve the interests of foreign companies. I guess that "natives" includes Europeans migrants living in other European countries and European citizens of non-European heritage.

[@Sir_Gerald_Nosehairs.]

@@katieee4915 France had to rely on British air support for it's recent jaunt in Mali. It is not remotely capable of projecting power or defending Europe, nor does it have the global delivery system the US and UK have for their nuclear weapons.

[@richardstone5552]

Thanks

[@Maxi-Ibele]

The EU is a mess and not very democratic. There are too few voices for their competencies. I hope that the EU will never continue to suffocate the member states

[@alexandrecordeiro4957]

Ithink the 3 tier version of Europe given by the french president,quite a good idea.I would love to see a bigger and stronger Europe,but it will take time and obviously our enemies won't like it. Europe knows that divided will not achieve nothing,we must unite,so we can be stronger.GOD BLESS EUROPE,AND THE EUROPEANS.

[@akhsdenlew1861]

i mean.. i want all of us to be friends and close allies. But i don't want us to be.. One. We are not usa.

[@cobraeditz9454]

@@akhsdenlew1861 top 15 strongest european countrys should just unite as one we dont need the rest it would cause more problems anyway

[@akhsdenlew1861]

@@cobraeditz9454 sounds impossible, and just a bad idea...although i am curious to hear those "15"

[@Harshhaze]

Short answer: no Long answer: no

[@DanielNistrean]

I'm against sovereignty of individual EU countries. We need to stick together.

[@Kiki67Cappi199]

Average imperialist westoid

[@joss4074]

"De facto empires are a good thing actually"

[@c63amgblack]

But why would anyone want this? Like how do the individuals in these countries benefit from a more centralized government, making more and more decisions further and further away from them?

[@fallout44454]

EU is not a government that is further away, if anything it's in many cases more actively engaged with regions and municipalities than the states are. Furthermore the EU have so far been able to reduce the damage that retarded memberstates like Hungary can cause.

[@iamlegq]

Do you like the US calling the shots? Because in practice that's how it currently works. Sanctions, trade deals, military cooperation, all of that an more needs a US seal of aproval first. A strong European Union would help return power back to Europe and achieve geopolitical independence from the US and other countries.

[@aaronhrynyk]

@@iamlegqso we don’t care about becoming fascists and authoritarians just as long as the US doesn’t run the show?

[@JTL1776]

Can we please get a CANZUK VIDEO.

[@KeiKAndLies]

We can't even trust the UK to keep to a union, let alone another newer one.

[@JKG52]

Whoever named the parts of the EU government needed to use a thesaurus. They really over use the word council

[@90Degrees_]

Man the EU parliament finna turn into the The Grand Convocation Chamber from star wars with that many members lol

[@edwinteisman6281]

Lol, it looks like you used the Russian flag instead of the Dutch flag in one of the early animations

[@severed6s]

great. now im an anarchist

[@neres5795]

From Lisbon to Vladivostok. Federal EU with powerful military and government based on the principles of enlightenment and democracy. Would be a true successor that would surely make even the Romans proud.

[@blackhole3298]

To ensure the final victory of western civilization and true equality and freedom from Japan to Lisbon to Washington to Canberra

[@moustachio05]

Based

[@ericgarza7832]

Can kingsandGenarals support March of empires

[@venomblizzard999]

Honestly Economic union as it is is best way, being federation will just fuck with country sovereignty and will of the people

[@filipe5722]

No, it would not.

[@akhsdenlew1861]

@@filipe5722 yes it would.

[@akhsdenlew1861]

@@filipe5722 yes.

[@clarkvincentga-as]

What happens if Turkiye joins the EU and the UK rejoins?

[@kadirbaba46]

Türkiye never join Europa

[@cartoonhead9222]

The Euroblob consumes all cultures.

[@samuelmargueret9626]

This is quite a thing you have produced here !! Something new i like it !!! Keep going on you have my full support as always

[@rms1034]

It makes the most sense for Europe to unify as a single federation super nation like the USA. This will put it into the category of super powers like USA and China, and can thus compete on a level playing field of economic and (eventually soon enough) military might. UK logically should join this large new superpower, adding it's might and benefiting from the weight of the new federation

[@TheMarilith]

I think UK will come back in a close future when they will change their minds, be more open and less focussed on themselves, I think this is just a matter of time, even if being aside with the US, the EU is closer and probably more profitable on the long term.

[@neochris2]

One thing I cant argue against, is the EU has successfully helped peace in a continent who is always fighting.

[@joshygoldiem_j2799]

This channel is literally producing videos for everything!

[@robbabcock_]

Thanks for a fascinating look "under the hood" of the EU!

[@azhadial7396]

I don't think it is fair so say that European countries (or at least some of them) are sovereign: - The economic policy is partly dictated centrally through what is constitutionally required by the TFEU, through the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) and through the Broad economic policy guidelines (BEPGs) - The economic policies and many others are also dictated by coercive pressure exerted by some members on other members (such as Germany's pressure to force France to abandon its competitive nuclear energy production, or western Europe pressuring to force Greece to implement austerity policies after the Greek crisis and against the will, expressed in a referendum, of Greek people, with disastrous consequences). - The EU is very opaque (and the European parliament, the most democratic institution of the EU, does not have much power, it does not even have the legislative initiative, yet it is supposed to be the legislative branch of the EU): most of European commission's reunions are confidential; the Eurogroup exerts an occult influence on government which cannot be estimated due to the complete opaqueness of the Eurogroup. - The EU (although with the complicity of national governments) has already bypassed the results of many referendums, among them the Greek anti-austerity referendum, but also the French and Dutch referendum in 2005 - The EU implements sanctions against Eastern European countries which wanted to regain some sovereignty. Even if we disagree with those countries on their anti-LGBTQ+ laws, anti-immigration laws, etc., it does not change the fact that if they were truly and completely sovereign, they would have the right to implement such laws without the interference and pressure of the EU or other nations. - The European Commission, as mentioned in the video, mostly functions through consensus voting, and since the 27 countries will never agree together at the same time on some important changes to the functioning of the EU, the status quo remains, and the said status quo continues to favor some countries at the expense of others and disrespect their sovereignty.

[@BarringtonDrive]

Id say they are sovreign. They are free to leave the club. But while you are in the club, and as long as you want the club's bemefits, there are minimum standards, economic and political to adhere to. If it were this controlling Moloch, Britain would not have been able to leave without armed conflict.

[@mormacil]

Sovereignty is their ability to make those choices. Just as the other states are sovereign to react and support actions within the EU. Being sovereign doesn't mean being free from consequences. If they lacked sovereignty they'd be overruled by the EU instead of being fined for refusing to listen. If anything the fines are a testament to their sovereignty.

[@azhadial7396]

@@BarringtonDrive The EU does not have any army, it could not keep the UK by force obviously. Although, it is important to note that the UK was never as integrated in the EU as other countries. This means that the departure of the UK was not as dangerous for the EU than the departure of a country like France or even Portugal (besides the UK has negotiated trade deals and implemented a soft Brexit). But your point is legitimate.

[@azhadial7396]

@@mormacil Well, that point could be considered valid for Poland, Hungary, etc. not for my other points. Although, it is a bit strange to consider a country is sovereign if other countries or a supranational institution actively pressures them to stop the implementation of a national policy. I guess the targeted country remains sovereign as long as she is willing to fight and take sanctions, but the goal still is to pressure the country into abandoning their national policy and thus renounce part of their sovereignty, accept what has been decided for her by another country or a supranational institution.

[@mormacil]

@@azhadial7396 Sovereignty is the ability to say no. They however also expressed a desire to be part of a club and that club decided they want their members to behave in a certain way. They have their sovereignty to leave the club. They even have it to refuse to listen and change their behaviour. But they don't have an innate right to be a part of that club. No amount of sovereignty grants that. Just you as an individual have the right to be a bigot but you don't have the right to not face the consequences of your actions. If Poland lacked sovereignty they would be forced to be a part of the EU and act in exact accordance with it's rules. But so far they have been able to reject those calls and they can still leave. Thus their sovereignty is entirely intact.

[@ArkTrooper1994]

'sigh' I need this lab protocol ready by today and it will be an absolute nightmare... oh a new K&G video!

[@travisvoelker4355]

Didnt the austrian empire try this?

[@WulfJudy-pj2wr]

It would be the best video ever if you made a video on Xenophons anabasis. Please give it some thought.

[@Arturino_Burachelini]

IDK if you should dabble into modern geopolitics... You have more than enough history to cover. The space here is bland and tunnel-visioned...

[@Arturino_Burachelini]

@@poki580 gotta insert your own 5 kopiikas with cliché bullshit

[@Arturino_Burachelini]

@@poki580 ???

[@klajdihatija6750]

Totally agree. Is the only way to have a safe and united Europe if we want to compete with Usa and China.

[@BeratLjumani]

Germany, France, and Spain joined together on a 6th Generation Fighter Project and can’t agree on it being Carrier capable, whose making what parts, etc… to the point 2035 is the optimistic goal for deployment. While the US is looking at 2030 projections for 2 6th Gen Fighters, and they’ve already recently revealed the B-21 a 6th Gen Bomber. The UK meanwhile pulled Italy, Japan, and Sweden into their own 6th Gen project as well. Never mind Poland’s goals of being the most militarized state in Europe with the goal of grinding Russian soldiers into dust for just looking at them funny. My point is the EU isn’t a super bloc, it can influence but as we’ve seen once nations feel threatened or have their own interests that unity goes out the door real quick. The recent Ukraine war has reminded Eastern Europe that relations with America will always match if not exceed relations with France or Germany. Especially when America is always up to fight where Germany’s lack luster approach to Ukraine hasn’t built anyone confidence in an EU super state.

[@genericscout5408]

Europe lacks alot of natural resources needed to compete long term. So as a super power they'd lose to any other power like China because China has 1. a larger population. 2. Somewhat reliable channels to get raw resources to manufacture.

[@pranays]

Are you trying to claim other countries like Canada had no say I the joint strike fighter program?😂

[@RRRRR15]

yeah sure, america is already preparing to pull out. poland thinks america is this super ally while america cares more about asia right now

[@BeratLjumani]

@@RRRRR15 Your Source? Cause if you can’t give anything accurate your just pulling this out of your ass. Poland is buying everything to be militarily self sufficient it’s not relying on the US to fight for them, it’s strategy is to be strong enough to deter conflict but if it comes kick ass and be ready to join in a greater NATO effort. China’s threat isn’t so great the US can’t project power in multiple fronts.

[@scorpixel1866]

@@RRRRR15 Because China is a far larger adversary which can threaten the world's critical trade routes. The US wants to pull out of Europe but couldn't because most NATO countries skimped-out on army funding for decades. The invasion of Ukraine demonstrated to the US that Russia wasn't the Soviet Union, and that what it inherited from it could be grinded down to irrelevancy, along European countries finally waking up to grease their military industry again. This is good for both the US and Europe, as the former will soon be able to fully concentrate on the largest threat while us European will hopefully not need a babysitter anymore.

[@ianblake815]

What would be the standard language for a European army?

[@uninstaller2860]

The language of love. No, I'm kidding. I'd wish it was Esperanto, but as English is the current Lingua franca, it's the most probable one.

[@abobanger9054]

English obviously, it's already the 2nd language in almost all of europe, more common than any other + that way the EU army would be speaking the same language as other Nato members, US army, Canadian Army, UK Army

[@marcoocram46]

Montenegro is already in NATO and should be a new member of the EU, that would give other countries hope that they too will join one day.🇲🇪🇪🇺🇪🇺🇲🇪

[@uninstaller2860]

We have a bouquet of roses waiting for you. Don't be late ❤

[@zaros1781]

I absolutely love MNE and believe that MNE joining the EU would benefit the EU and MNE massively. Your politicians just need to get their act together and ensure that MNE joins the EU asap.

[@MW_Asura]

Montenegro would do well in the EU. It's probably the chillest of the Balkan countries