• Yes but we need to find a common languish

    We need to find a common languish. Maybe we need to make one that is really strict whit few simple rules and no exceptions. This would enable it to be easy to learn. Maybe even phonetic so its easy to write down.
    Than a system to not lose your culture you just learn your mother languish but the second languish would be this union languish.

  • Unity is strength

    We are slowly becoming a group of fledgling states, squabbling over petty matters. United we would be the most economically, militaristic and social advanced country, a symbol for all the world to emulate and awe. We need to evolve past our differences to prosper in the modern world. We would be the next superpower, far exceeding any that came before.

  • It could be...

    Yes I believe that in roughly 50 years time it will become The United States of Europe similar to the USA....
    Separate states within a greater union,individual state laws plus one overall union law,one currency,one army but with (like the USA )state regiments like the National Guard,although most will detest what I have written it is the general overall plan for Europe,it`s worked for the USA and over their 230 year history has shown that united is stronger,
    The fact is that that is what is planned,the children being born now will more than likely grow up in a Europe us older ones will find quite odd,,

  • Globalization is the key to success

    If the EU becomes a country, this will have a substantial benefit on the economy of the whole world. Bigger trade, better communication, more science research and so on. However I don't think there should be an official language because this would cause negative tension between the states.
    Borders increase the world suck. Nationalism is the worst way to do anything.

  • 1) Language - More prospects , 2) Unifying cultures - Real values always survive

    1) All that language variety makes only problems for ambitious people, who'd like to realize their dreams, but don't want to pay the price of becoming barely communicative and unable to express themselves. What are the good aspects, on the other hand? Fun with learning them? What kind of an argument is this, when look at all the downsides?
    2) Unifying cultures... They say "truth can defend itself". The same with value of "culural values". In such a blend, many useless, and pointless stuff regarding mentality would be finally gotten rid of, and replaced by real values, that all those cultures would agree for.

  • It's a good idea.

    Europe is falling into debt, as shown by the falling of Greece into debt. Also, Europe's countries are reliant on each other. If they united, then they would be a much stronger power, able to catapult themselves out of their debt, and making them a true world power, not a grouping of small countries held together by a single alliance.

  • Europe will rise as a singular power.

    Why do I make this statement one might ask?

    Simple, Europeans have always been at war in the past. Yet today due to corrupt governments who make it their life goal to breed us out, we have no one to turn to but our European brothers.

    As grim and horrible as it might sound, we got a choice... Unite or die.

    But this will not happen through the European Union, as Europeans become enraged with the Economic, Multicultural, Political and other policies of these types an extreme right is given a rise., all over Europe.

    What in my mind will most likely happen is a Nationalist and Isolationist Europe, that looks to no other but probably Russia which is also basically Europe.

    To point out the symptoms of what I have just said.

    Violence towards European is at it's peak coming from Foreigners. Result is that the extreme right rises, look at the Dutch Freedom party, the Greek Golden dawn etc etc etc.

    Europe is the pride of it's people and it's people will under no circumstance let it fall. So if Europeans get the choice I previously stated it will Unite against Non Europeans and it will most likely go for "Ethnical Cleansing", "Economic Independance" and in these manners it will rise up to be a wealthy Superpower and it will most likely remain the only Superpower.

    People do not realize that Europe is like Heaven on earth, but in due time they will.

  • It must.

    It's the only way to assure the survival of the people of Europe in a world which is becoming increasingly hostile to them. At this moment the people of Europe have two paths ahead of them: to be bred out of existence and turned into a minority in their own land, or to accept their destiny and turn into the greatest empire the world have ever seen. A united Europe will automatically become for the rest of the world what a united Germany became in the XIXth century for Europe. The dominant power.

  • Europe should not become one country

    My belief is that Europe should remain as it is. Since there is no apparent problem with the country remaining as it is, why would one want to change it? I say, leave it alone and things will continue on without problems of causing added confusion. If there were a good reason for change I would possibly reconsider.

  • United we stand

    Huge standing on global stage, especially if EU was united with Russia, giving the hypothetical federation essentially the strongest soft power and influence and with a United military split into each of the states forces would give Europe the biggest amount of hard power in the world along with the fact that with Uk, France and Russia unified, their nuclear stockpile would be unchallengeable, and also would bring political peace to balkans and Eastern Europe aswell as ushering a era of economic prosperity for Europe especially in Eastern Europe.

  • No, Europe should not become one country.

    Europe is very vast and encompasses a large land mass and many millions of people. There are many different ethnicities, cultures and languages. It would be very difficut to meld all the nationalities into one big country. The countries using the Euro do have much in common, but making one big country does not seem prudent.

  • Is it what the people want

    As a hole it is up to the people, but each country might have different views on such topics such as immigration depending on who there country boarder. If someone came into your country and tried to start makeing changes that u didnt agree with wouldn't u be mad. If I went to another country I would think I should change to fit in not try to change everyone else. It seems the EU is already just that so what would really change. Let each country govern themselves and deal with there own problems. Remember the people should run the government not the other way around. One group governing a large area don't know the people the same as a group of people governing a small area. An area I would think they lived in and understood the problems of the people in that area

  • No to soulless mass

    I really wouldn't like that. People would just lose their cultural identities. Now we can enrich Europe, every country brings in something different. If we were like USA we would lose our soul, just mass production of new economic and military force would begin, is that what we really want?

  • No to Europe the Country, Yes to Europe the Continent!

    All member states have different views, visions, languages, traditions and ways of doing things. Nobody asked for their country to join such an undemocratic, monetarily wasteful, bureaucratic European Union - where Merkel says "jump" and the spineless puppet governments of the other member states squeal "how high?". Do what she says or do what she says. We have no say. And for David Cameron to stand there in Westminster and lie through his teeth (which isn't a rarity for him) and say that Britain has a voice in the EU is just plain bull. We will not only survive by leaving the EU, we will thrive. How? Well, not having to pump £12bn+ into an EU account in Brussels that has not been signed off/published ever, not being shackled to ludicrous legislation and red tape, being able to say who can come in and who can stay (Australian-Style Points System) and finally - make our own Free Trade Agreements with growing and emerging economies. Unfortunately, the established British politicians for too long have turned their backs on the Commonwealth. The Commonwealth is unique and united through diversity. It is much respected by the British and other Commonwealth Citizens because it does not dictate to them how to run their everyday lives with crippling and ridiculous legislation. The Commonwealth of Nations recognizes that it is NOT one single country - nor is it trying to become one. However, the EU is seriously moving towards becoming a superstate - again without consulting the very people it will affect.

  • Too much Cultural difference

    The overwhelming amount of languages, accents, dialects and cultures would make it very difficult to integrate everyone into one county. Although it would probably bring economic benefits that would allow Europe to compete with the US and China in terms of GDP, I fear it would remove the individual countries' sense of identity and history.

  • Too much Cultural difference

    The overwhelming amount of languages, accents, dialects and cultures would make it very difficult to integrate everyone into one county. Although it would probably bring economic benefits that would allow Europe to compete with the US and China in terms of GDP, I fear it would remove the individual countries' sense of identity and history.

  • We are very different.

    To put it in another way - Try condensing South America into a single state. That would be hard, right? And they have only two languages and a very similar heritage.

    In Europe, the cultures go from the Sami in the north to Islamic Albania. Not even considering the nationalism and patriotism you build after a thousand years of being a country.

    Then there's language - 24 languages are official, but there's multiple languages not represented. Which would you propose be used by politicians? Or should each area elect a certain number of representatives? In that case, Norway would get about .6% of the vote, as an example.
    The smallest country with its own language would be Iceland, with 300 000 people. If you say they get one representative and go from there, there would be 2500 total representatives. Iceland would also get .04% of the vote. Is that fair? Or should the countries decide their own laws? But then it would just be a messy union, just as it is now.

  • Too many issues

    No. Since the Euro was introduced the economy just got worse and worse. Also, you can never have so many languages and cultural differences in one modern country. One thing that also should be counted in is criminality. Criminality is Eastern-Europe is far, far worse than in Western-Europe, and making Europe one big country would just give them open play.
    Some political parties here (the Netherlands) are already making plans to get us out of the European Country, and if we would leave, we would be happy!

  • It can never become one Country

    There is no way can the people afford to continue to elect and pay for Politicians that can no longer Govern their own Country. We cannot even hold a conversation with foreigners here in theUK. We were promised that there would be no loss of essential Sovereignty if we joining the Common Market. That was what the people of the UK were told. No one can believe anything any Politician says any more.

  • No way on Earth!

    There would be riots in London, Riga and Athens if the European Union became a country. The three are all eurosceptic countries - the UK and Greece will most likely leave within the decade, but Latvia will stay in to keep a somewhat stable economy. The UK is very different to, say, Romania. The only countries that would want this are the ' big continental five ' and the ' scrounging eastern block '. If this were to happen, surely the world should then go on to become one nation if Europe does? Yeah, those in the U.S would not want this, and neither would we.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.