Should there be a ‘hegemonic’ country, or at least a leading country, within the EU to provide as much direction as possible for the bloc?

[Julie07]

[abc3643]

Not de jure but de facto.

My problem with the EU is that it is a confederation, not a federation.
History shows confederations fail... always... because, sooner or later, one or more members of the confederation are going to have an "irreconcilable difference" with the other members, so they leave.
In a federation, that cannot happen without approval. A federation has a strong central source which has limited but ruling powers.

For instance, the United States is a federation. The US national government is called the Federal Government and, when referring to it by law, is called "The United States". The Federal Government has supremacy meaning that if the Federal Government creates a law which contradicts a state law, the federal law holds. However, federal laws are limited in what they can govern. So, for instance, in the US, money and defense and immigration and interstate commerce are all handled at the federal level. However, laws governing commerce within the state only are not subject to federal jurisdiction.

France is a unitary nation and not a federation; it's national government is even more powerful.

Here's an important example to illustrate the difference.
In France, the national government establishes the borders of all administrative regions or departments (*). It can eradicate a region or department or split it up or create new ones.
In the US, the national government can admit a new state, but it can't alter its boundaries or change its name or anything else. A state in the US is like a nation in the EU: It is a distinct entity and cannot be rendered nonexistent by the overarching authority... so the EU can make a nation unexist just like the US can't make a state unexist. In France, the national government can make a department unexist.

(*) For readers not familiar with French political divisions, an "administrative region" and a "department" are geographically akin to a state and counties.


Back to the EU, since there is no binding authority than can assert its will over its members, members may leave. And that's what happened with the UK during "Brexit". In the US, a federation, a state cannot secede like that.

Keep in mind that the US was once a confederation also - a confederation which failed. From 1776 until 1789, the US was under the Articles of Confederation. However, problems arose and the Founding Fathers got together in the summer of 1787 to fix it, but they realized that they couldn't, so they started over with the intention of scrapping the Articles of Confederation and re-establishing the US with a strong national government. However, and especially back then, states had a strong sense of identity and they wouldn't just buy in to a new stronger national government. They'd want to retain some powers of their own. Thus, the US became a federation and the US Constitution became the literary blueprint for the Federal Government created by the Founding Fathers at the Constitutional Convention in the summer of 1787.

[abc3643]

TYPO CORRECTION:

In the US, the national government can admit a new state, but it can't alter its boundaries or change its name or anything else. A state in the US is like a nation in the EU: It is a distinct entity and cannot be rendered nonexistent by the overarching authority... so the EU ____CANNOT____ make a nation unexist just like the US can't make a state unexist.

[sawno]

No, the whole EU needs to be abolished. Its a dictatorial institution with a fake democracy whose parliament holds no real power over the direction things go in. I can't vote the direction of my country because of them, the only vote we have is to leave it.

[Intelligent_Lady]

No. I believe every country should make its own decisions and look after its own interests. Cooperation is important, but I don't think one country should dominate or provide direction for all the others.

[_Jenny_]

@Julie07 I had to look up Hegemonic because I never heard or saw that word before.. I feel stupid

[DryGermanGuy]

It doesn't have to be a single country, I always liked the Berlin-Paris consultation axis. I would have preferred a powerful Berlin-London-Paris triangle, but unfortunately the UK seems to be distracted with... I don't know what, really. Trying to be America's poodle? 🤔

[Levin]

Oh, how erotic that would have been. A Berlin und London und Paris Liebe triangle.

Berlin first of course!

[Julie07]

That’s what I thought too, but leadership of this kind is not without its own challenges, as these three major powers already have differing interests, and the other EU countries would probably not want to be subject to such a thing.

It’s a delicate balance to strike.

[Guanfei]

Berlin-Paris never existed. It was always only mentioned on the French side, but Germany never saw France as an equal. The EU is Germany playground, and as Mercosur and the tariff negotiations with the US has shown, the EU would sacrifice anyone to benefit Germany.

[DryGermanGuy]

@Guanfei
Wrong on all accounts. Germany might be the strongest nation in Europe but that doesn't mean we have to constantly address the inferiority complexes of others. A little historical detail: When chancellor Kohl took the oath of office in 1982, on the very same day he went to Paris to visit François Mitterrand.

[Guanfei]

And we're in 2026, when the EU accepted the Mercosur and the US tariffs because it was beneficial to Germany and its cars exportations.
Welcome to the present.

[DryGermanGuy]

You're astonishingly misinformed. These idiotic tariffs are damaging German car exports and all other European car exports, for that matter. It's more about getting the orange lunatic somewhat under control. I'm certain, all this will be renegotiated with a more intelligent person in the White House from 2029.

[Zack-Bann]

No. Because it will require other countries to hand over their sovereignty to that leader which will cause problems as it always has throughout history.


The EU serves one purpose, stop European leaders from going to war with one another because everyone as a hand every other pocket through business and free trade.


It’s not perfect but it kept the peace for years and years.


And changing it now would just send us back to the pre-EU era of constant conflicts

[KostasKouvalis]

I don't know what that means. I've never heard this word.

Ah! Isn't Germany already doing that? Under Merkel they were pushing around other countries forcing them to accept refugees and LGBTs, and sanctioning them if they didn't. And the current leader of the EU is a German, so where's basically working in Germany's interests. But no, it's a stupid idea. Although my dad thinks RUSSIA should be the boss and police of Europe.

[Julie07]

Russia as Europe’s boss? Never

[RavVid]

The problem with Europe is... It has a lot of very little countries. Germany, France, Italy are big enough to be efficient militarily however I can't see how small countries can be. Only 7 countries are over 20 mill in wikipedia page. Depending if you include UK as they aren't EU but are Nato

I just fail to see how it can work without some hegemonic power. France Germany and Italy could be hegemonic combined

[Wodens_Apprentice]

No

France should be balkanised into fractured little states and be forced to give up Normandy & Aquitaine to England.

Think this is just cope? Think again. We're planning our revenge on you for dumping a load of rapists onto our shore.

[Wodens_Apprentice]

Actually yes, the future English Empire should extract tribute from all it's neighbours and we'll provide them protection with our future mercenary bands.

[foxsquirrell]

That is not democratic. No there should not be a leading country to decide EU policy and law. I do not know how it works really, but I think the president of the EU should be removed. What I want is simply a body made up of the member countries representatives, which votes on issues and directions democratically. The majority wins. Simple.

[MrChinaski]

Britain?

Seriously. If it's going to be a military force to replace NATO it needs the UK and French nuclear umbrella (which also means onshoring production of warheads from the US) and the German industrial base.

Brex-in?

[MrChinaski]

The rest of the EU are optional.

[KostasKouvalis]

Ew. Those Muslim lovers? Those, Orwellians?

[Guanfei]

There shouldn't be any EU. Each country should be completely sovereign. At best, the EU should be an institution helping trade between country, and should be banned from any political decision.

[Levin]

I think that should be Germany. Germany should exercise zee control of the zee rei... union. This will be of great benefit for all.

[DryGermanGuy]

The UK is always welcome to join, or re-join, in their case. Which I think at one point they will do, when even the most hardcore Americophiles realize, that the United States will not treat them as an equal (amazing trade deals, anyone?).

[Levin]

Yeah I thought the idea of trade deals with the US and India was pretty stupid. We have the EU on our doorstep with similar standards. Low level economic union would have been fine.

The EU and all of Europe is in severe decline. White people are looking to become a minority in some countries in the space of 40 years.

Your creaky club is finished.

[DryGermanGuy]

Not sure what made you so negative and jaded, but I refuse to go along with that.

[Just_Ken]

The EU is basically run by Germany. Think of it like the fourth Reich.

[goaded]

Tell that to France.

[Just_Ken]

@goaded send them round i will.

[Just_Ken]

@goaded see they already surrendered

[indissoluble]

Obviously there should not be, but clearly that is the direction the EU is going toward Nazi (Islamic) dictatorship.

[andreasderjuengere]

Europe's cultural superiority - and strength- roots in its diversity.
Power must be diluted and spread.
'Direction' must not be controlled by some dominant 'leadership'.

[andreasderjuengere]

Comment: your picture shows some non-EU members

[strateguy632]

no way. that would defeat the goal of unity. everyone contributes to the e. u. leadership. parliament etc.

[lilBigPotato]

Nope. They goes against the spirit of the EU.

[OneViewpoint]

Oh shit, here we go again. Someone wants to be in charge.

[AviatorTom]

Isn't that what Germany does, or at least tries to do?

[Jersey2]

The Germans are so bad at it though. They can make mechanical things, that’s it. They are so bad at much of everything else.

[Anonymous]

The EU was effectively founded by bitter Nazis post-WW2 with the aim to control the land they didn't win hence the anger of Britain leaving and Russia laughing at them

[genericname85]

no. cause that would destabilize the entire thing. it's already undemocratic enough as is.

[Godihateyou]

The EU is completely useless conquered by mud bloods

[FreyaRed]

Hegemony contradicts democracy

[Anonymous]

Germany and France together.

[Anonymous]

Yes! France!