The EU is a much bigger free movement zone that the Uk will be. Not ruled by force like the Roman Empire.

Also trading areas tend to lead to political and economic convergence which tends to leads to borders becoming less relevant. We may be regression a bit currently but it's only heading one way longer term.

I'm not a pacifist but I wouldn't take it as an insult.

Are we allowed to post here and not dislike the people we profoundly disagree with

You're making the same argument that Norman Angell made in 1909 in "The Great Illusion". That didn't go so well.

The tribal instinct in people is VERY strong, and while it's true that outright wars are a lot less common, I think it's a long reach to argue that most people want to live in a homogeneous mass. I don't think that Greeks and Danes have quite as much in common as you seem to think they do, for example.

In 1910 there were about 20 countries in Europe. In 1946, about 30. Today, closer to 50. That's a considerable increase in the number of borders, and how much less relevant those borders are is certainly open to discussion. I don't think the border between, say, Macedonia and Greece is somehow less relevant - until a few years ago, it didn't even exist.

MM MD

Or thinking about it, when was the last time two or more separate countries managed to merge together successfully? The UAR fell apart. Yugoslavia split as soon as Tito died. India and Pakistan split as soon as the Brits decided to get the **** out. There was some sort of half-ass West Indes Federation that I only know about because I'm a stamp collector, and that's a distant memory. The Czechs and the Slovaks decided to split. I guess Germany would come to mind, but that was an artificial division in the first place. Seems like a lot more borders, not less.

Am I forgetting a merger?

MM MD

it was created by force but for an ancient empire Rome was surprisingly held together by good will of the conquered people ( there was 2 legions controlling the whole of spain and france, compared to the 15 on the German border)

It wasn't until Rome fell into corruption and high tax that this mega state broke down.

The entire history of the world and especially Europe is an ebb and flow of states becoming larger and smaller with Rome being the largest and from long ago. We are currently in a phase where Europe is fracturing more now that security isn't much of an issue under USA/nato umbrella. There is no arrow of history

While your point is right, it adds weight to the view that Europe's future lies in smaller units that lie within a larger centralised government; if you must, a United States Of Europe with devolved autonomy to the regions.

"There is no arrow of history "

Of course there is. The arrow pretty clearly points away from Kings ruling by devine right, and Leninist communism's arrow is pretty much broken. Predicting which way any one of the various arrows points is, on the other hand, pretty tough to do at the time.

"While your point is right, it adds weight to the view that Europe's future lies in smaller units that lie within a larger centralised government; if you must, a United States Of Europe with devolved autonomy to the regions."

Maybe. The smaller unit part seems pretty clear. Why it has to end up in a larger centralized government isn't. We had to fight a pretty big war in the 1860's to "agree" on that and especially that once in there was no way out (no "Texit" would be possible)
Without having such a provision, getting every player to give up enough autonomy to form a US of Europe seems.....unlikely.

MM MD

dictators and oligarchs rule the vast majority of the world, full democracies only run between 15-20% of world population by most estimates. The politics of the world doesn't seem much different from Plato's Republic about rules of one, few and many.

the world may be moving in certain directions, but saying its an inexorable arrow that moves in a direction you know where to is a misreading of history of the highest order.

who would've said in the 50s that Marxism would utterly collapse by the end of the century.

Because capitalism's thirst for ever greater efficiency can be met by economy of scale.

No one said it would be a smooth transition and I was against it now for that reason, believing that we (Europeans) probably aren't ready for it yet and that it was more likely at this time to lead to strife/war than to a peaceful unified state.

Politicians are impatient and egoistical when it comes to grand projects, but I do think that it's the future.

Yeah, I think you have more faith in human nature than I do - which isn't a bad thing. Historically, most grand projects fail. It's possible that given enough time, all do. I do agree that Europe isn't ready for greater union at this time. When (and if) they ever will be remains to be seen.

From across the pond, Euroland doesn't look very homogenous. There seems to be a lot more agreement in the US at a bedrock level that despite all the problems we have as a society that we're in it together (and I think and hope that Trump's current free-fall in the polls reflects that) I don't have the sense that some farmer in Croatia feels that way about a Belgian shopkeeper. But I freely admit that I could be way off on this, and that it could change. Anyway, interesting discussion.

MM MD

What I find interesting is the distinction between the farmer in Croatia and the shopkeeper in Belgium, who I agree probably have little in common.

But if you pair the Belgian shopkeeper with a shopkeeper in Portugal you'll probably find they have more in common with each other than with many of their compatriots.

This, most countrys itself are quite heterogen, except for the language. The german cleaning lady and the german manager dont have anthing in common.

Having a common language means same books, same TV, same "famous people", same traditions, same sense of humour, same expectations from interactions with other people.

What do the cleaning ladies in Germany and Portugal have in common when we see people as more than units of production and consumption?

lol gob****e

Michael Gove is the worst. More at 10.

I agree with this. I think Europe would/will work but Would be smoother if they take it at a slower pace.... It will be interesting if Europes response to Brexit is quicker/deeper integration or a step back to let the dust settle.

Things that are more important to how they feel about their lives than celebrities and crap TV are, such as their wages, social status and relationship with their employers.

It relates to the idea of guilds that goes back a thousand years.

You really underestimate social status and education level here. People which big differences in that respect won't read the same books, watch the same TV programs or laugh about the same jokes necessarily.

This may be slow pony or previously posted by someone else, but I ran across this interesting article speculating on whether Article 50 will ever be triggered and Brexit will actually happen.

http://sputniknews.com/columnists/20...um-brexit.html

Is "Sputniknews.com" a Russian English-language web site? (I ran across this link while reading an article about Russian Borei-class nuclear missile submarines.)

I would ignore SputnikNews, its a Kremlin run media organisation. Nothing positive about the West is coming out of that News site.

Then perhaps we should redraw the map on a guild basis.

Though the things you mention aren't the most important things to how people feel about their lives, it's mostly things which are primarily outside the scope of legitimate politics.

Agreed, up to a point, though some countries have more class divisions than others. The point is that what shared culture does cross the social boundaries helps to lubricate the society in which we all have to get along with each other, whereas that doesn't work across borders.

A good example is that in the UK you can collect a lot of money (relative to the seriousness of the problems) for charities to spend on UK problems, much less for problems in Africa and nothing at all for Portuguese charities - despite all the hipsters saying how "European" they feel, there is no sense of solidarity with people elsewhere in Europe.

You think the fact that hipsters don't give to Portuguese charities is a good example of the lack of European solidarity?

Not even true that giving is much less for problems in Africa. Biggest receiver of funds is for vaccinations around the world.

Do your favourite brands show how divided Brexit Britain is?

Anyone who rates richmond sausages should obviously have the right to vote removed.