I think if the EU becomes a super-nation then many powers should be retained by the individual states. For example taxation, spending etc. Realistically only Eurozone nations can become united as you can't run a nation with multiple currencies. Debt would also have to be centralised for the same reason.
Ultimately the most crucial aspect would be to establish the EU Parliament as the sovereign EU institution and remove things like the Council of Europe, the European council (they are different), the Council of Ministers and the Commission. Also the EU would have to stop pandering so much to the national interests of the few. The French have a ridiculously unfair amount of influence in Europe, from the Common Agricultural Policy to having 2 parliament buildings that the MEPs have to shuttle between for no reason whatsoever.
Ultimately though a proper united EU will eventually solve the problem of Europe collectively being a huge power but due to being splintered into many nations, it is practically ignored. To put things in perspective, it has a larger economy than the USA if you treat it as one country. You wouldn't have guessed from the little influence it has in the world.
I should think that it would be best to keep the union subdivided into multiple provinces, as you could have a layer of government devoted specifically to regional concerns. If you didn't, then the central government would have to make all the decisions for the nation in its entirety. They might not be as well informed on the issues as local politicians, and to have to make those extra decisions would put undue strain on their resources. Surely it's best to delegate some degree of authority to regional governments, who are in turn governed by the central government.
Europe isn't going to be a superpower the coming century. Sure, it will be a top seven world player, but one of the lesser ones. Our population is getting older, we don't have that much raw materials and we are not willing to use force in politics. On the other hand we still will be rather wealthy with good life expectancy IF we manage economic and political stability (which I am pretty optimistic about, actually).
No, most of it can't change: -Our population is getting older -We don't have that much raw materials -Europe is a combinations of different peoples, different languages. We are reasonable good at cooperation, but don't allow to be dominated by one group or the other. Those are given.
I hope (and expect) Europe will be pretty stable, but it won't have the means or the aspiration to become a world leader.
Read a few of the future forecasts that have been made for 2030 by different thinkers, companies and organizations: [link]
AnataraKentaraFeatured By OwnerDec 15, 2012Hobbyist Traditional Artist
If everything stays the same, it won't change, but we cannot assume the future is stagnant - who knows what can happen. Economic collapse can change governments, governmental programs can change populations. While far-fetched dreams cannot happen, surely, a little change on top of a cascade of scenarios and causes can lead to a different Europe.
If it would happen, and even stay together. The Nations should be allowed some level off autonomity. Mostly because each coountry has it's own culture and tradition and as said earlier, every one hates the guy at the other side of the hill.
But then we have another problem, should there be as it is now that each nation gets representatives to the senate relative to it's population or ssame ammount nation? The way things are now is understandable but could easily lead in the minorities(small nations) being screwed over, but with equal ammount of persons representing each country the city states get huge boost in influence. Still at least taht way there will at least be a change that south wont screw us over.
Yes I am really worried of that and I can see why it would cause some one to frown, but seeing how their politicians act is not reassuring that all would be fine. And not to mention the urge to protect wolves there seems to be... Not our fucking fault that they are extinct in there! If you want to save them, we'll gladly send every single one of them to them! Let's see how long it takes until they start pegging we'd sent hunters to take care of that wolf problem. (Don't take this the wrong way, I'm all for protecting species. But those are a problem in some parts of the country where wolf population is relatively heavy, Russians and Swedish can back that claim too)
My bet, if that ever is really going to happen, it will include a civil war(s). Or just a huge ass cluster fuck when all the roosters are trying to top each others.
AnataraKentaraFeatured By OwnerDec 14, 2012Hobbyist Traditional Artist
In a represenative government, I would say 1 senator per "nation".
A possible, lower house based on population could work, but then, what's the point? They'll just fight each other for funds and laws that would hurt each other more, when 1 senator can do this (with his/her staff, of course)
Autonomous nations - to an extent. That is always the question - what is to much, what is to little? Look at Spain - they actually gave the provinces what they wanted in funds and the nation was in a fragile economic state, now being shattered by the EU. To give to much freedom, especially on province-level spending, is a rocky, rocky road. Oh, and, like always, the provinces look at the center and blame it for everything.
Still if no autonomy is given, by what standards do we go by? if money is pooled together than then used universally the richer coutries would pay for the poorer ones, which is just as bad as leting certain countries run their own economy.
And then there are the enviroment dependant laws, to south europeans our laws seem ridiculous and over reaching, to us their laws are inadequate.
Next military. See a lot of countries have professional military. But then there are those who have conscripton based army, like in here Finland. Now to us the fact that every man is trained soldier is part of our national pride. Also we can't aford credibly sized professional military with out taking the funds from somewhere else, which is not a good idea for us either. So if the funding would remain same but switching to professional army would happen, we'd have to rely on, for example, French and Italians... You see the problems in that, don't you?
Education... You know either we bring Spain and others in similar state to same level we are or we go down to there. And the later option is a no go.
Cultures. Do you honestly expect that there'd be no conflicts at all? EU is even now having trouble with Romania to get rid of child marriages(the kind where families organize a mariage between their kids).
Health care, again same problems as with education and military, needs tobe universalized, but by which standards.
And the list goes on. But do not worry,two world wars is enough to prevent us from starting to fight any time soon... How ever to us Finns and Baltics, Russia is our only threath, if not overly likely one. We'll start worrying about Islamic extrimists when they even find us from the map. And even then, well there is a reason why we have our reputation .
AnataraKentaraFeatured By OwnerDec 14, 2012Hobbyist Traditional Artist
The EU is a supra national union, based on a alliance, trying to become a full government. By default, it will fuck everything up, because it was never meant to control nations as a true government, and yet it is trying too.
It will fail if it continues trying to being something it was not meant to be.