With all thats going on in the world, the prospect of a united EU federation is growing in the mainstream. I was wondering, would any of you support Irish entry into it?
I, personally, have been swayed. We have enemies all around. Europe is hated by pretty much all of the major world powers. I dont think that, divided, we can do anything more than be puppets. But united, we could have a real say. Better to be federated than to be ruled from D.C, Beijing or Moscow, I say.
I know its a real hypothetical, but I also think the conversation is growing. Ireland without the EU was pretty much nothing, and has benefited so much from it. And while I understand the concern of Neutrality, let's face it, if any of the powers truly set their eyes on Europe, that includes Ireland. In that situation, we would still be a target. (Such as Bannon and other MAGA influencers wanting an 'Irish Trump'. At least in a Federal Europe, we'd have a fighting chance, not only militarily, but also economically and politically as an independent power.
What do you think?
[deleted]
I do think it's worsened by the fact EU Commissioners are unelected. They have no mandate to do anything except debase themselves. EU Commissioners should be selected from the national MEP pool.
Eu Commissioners are just senior civil servants whose job it is to carry out MEP instructions . No civil servant is ever elected.
They are not civil servants, they are politicians.
The reason EU Commissioners aren’t directly elected and are called Commissioners rather than Ministers traces back to how the EU’s founders built its institutional logic and to political sensitivities about national sovereignty. A lot of the EU is half baked because of this. They are nominated and MEPs can reject the nomination of commissioners as a whole, not on an individual basis.
The alternative is directly/ representatively elected commissioners. This would naturally give them more power and democratic legitimacy.
Government ministers aren't directly elected in most systems. In many, including the Irish system, they don't have to be elected at all. Pippa Hackett was the most recent example, she was a super junior cabinet member in the last government as a senator.
UK government always has unelected cabinet members, it's a convention. David Cameron as Foreign Secretary is a recent example.
France, government ministers can't be elected, if a MP is appointed to government they have to resign their seat. Michel Barnier had not held an elected domestic position in France for 25 years when he was appointed French PM in 2024.
I can't think of any system where cabinet members are directly elected. You can have a directly elected president, who appoints them, or you can have MPs, who elect a PM, who appoints them, but any system I'm familiar with, the individual ministers are not directly elected.
So this isn't exactly some outlier, it's the norm.
You're correct in all the details above, but I wouldn't say the EU system falls within the norm.
In a presidential system, you elect a president who appoints a cabinet. In a parliamentary system, you elect TDs/ MPs who then form a government, elect a Taoiseach/ PM who in turn selects a cabinet.
In the EU system, the German Chancellor and the French President go into a dark room and come out when they've hand picked someone to hoist on the rest of us as the most powerful figure in the EU. In VDL's case, Merkel saw an opportunity to rid herself a minister in her own cabinet that few outside of Germany & the political sphere had ever heard of, and in doing so completely disregard the Spitzenkandidat process that they had pretended to push ahead of that European parliament election, which would have at least given the whole charade a facade of democratic legitimacy.
That person then heads a Commission which is made up of individuals nominated by national govts - so, you could make an argument that they're sort of representative of each state based on that state's own most recent general election, but it's certainly a few steps removed from democratic.
On balance, I'd say there's more transparency and democracy in how they elect a new pope than the European Commission.
https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/government-in-ireland/european-government/eu-institutions/european-commission/
(Civil servants)
It doesn't say civil servants. Can civil servants be members of political parties, speak at political rallies, endorse polticial candidates, go on television to talk about their political party?
yes, yes, yes, and yes. Civil servants can also go forward for election.
COs can do a limited amount of activity, but otherwise civil servants can't publicly engage in politics
Correct for the Irish civil service but this thread is about EU commissioners.
Commissioners can do so: https://commission.europa.eu/about/service-standards-and-principles/ethics-and-good-administration/commissioners-and-ethics/code-conduct-members-european-commission_en
Because they are politicians.
The European Commission is the executive branch of the EU. Most of the people working in the Commission are indeed civil servants, just as most of the people in an Irish government department are civil servants.
Each department has a director-general who reports to the Commissioner. The DG is equivalent to the Secretary General of an Irish government department and is the head civil servant. The Commissioner is more akin to a government minister than a civil servant.
Commissioners have a different legal status to the staff of the Commission, who are civil service. They are recognised as political appointees, have no qualifications other than nomination and confirmation by the parliament, have to take an oath, are explicitly excluded from EU Staff Regulations, and are not covered by labour law; they must resign if the President of the Commission requests it. They serve for a fixed 5-year term. The actual civil service have to pass examinations to get the job, have contracts, a permanent job, and can't be fired for political reasons, only for misconduct.
The Commission sets policy and is the only institution that can initiate legislation. They're the executive branch of the EU setup.
The failure to require an election for the power centre of the EU is the biggest single indicator of the democratic deficit that has long been criticised in the EU.
Here’s the point, they can initiate but cannot legislate. Guess what civil servants can and can’t do.
I hear it's a well paid job
It's more important what they do than say. I wouldn't expect the EU to go to war over Venezuela. And too few Europeans want to piss off the yanks. So, they are doing what most people want. No one would take a pay cut to make a stand. Few enough did over Israel, and they don't have aircraft carriers.
No
All the ambition is well meaning but is there a single large country with a functional parliamentary system? America is bonkers, China is illiberal, Russia is autocratic, India is devolving to religious tribalism. Brazil swings widely between populist extremes. I can't help but feel like the larger a democracy the more it's politics regress. There's a reason we've had such useless EU Commission Presidents. Who's to say the thing would even work?
Is the problem the size of a country; or the ways in which modern “informed voters” become informed?
After all, Democracy is not some god-given system that has always worked. It’s possible it may legitimately break in the face of internet propaganda and major innovations or changes might be needed to put it right (if that’s even possible).
Now, some democracies are stronger than others: voting systems seem to matter a lot. But maybe the USA isn’t so fucked because it’s so large inherently… maybe it was just the biggest market for billionaires and corporations to carve up first.
I don't think that there's any correlation between size of a country and success of democracy. Off the top of my head, Hungary, Turkey, and Venezuela are all smaller countries which have experienced democratic backsliding.
I do, I think democracies above 100 million+ populations tend to struggle.
But as I pointed out, lots of countries with lower population also have struggling democracies while countries with over 100m people like Mexico have stable democracies.
Mexico does not have a stable democracy
I disagree, however Japan is undeniably a stable democracy with over 100 million people.
I think the EU presidents have the two problems of lacking any authority and then being chosen by the member states and not the voters. This means they're usually lacking any charisma and significance which is how the member states like it.
Canada?
You're right. 100%, its risky. But i would still rather TRY, yk?
Beats sitting down and taking it
One thing i would like to add. Wo say's it won't work? We tried the separate country system around the globe for already thousands of years. Looking at history that didn't work out that great either.
I'm just saying smaller democracies are far more functional. The big countries have the worst track records.
How functional is our small democracy if, as the very sensible smart centrists keep insisting, our politicians must be forbidden from doing or saying or thinking anything that annoys the US? Or anyone else?
US post WW2 did alright. China did pretty well economically the last little while. Rome took 300 years to collapse. The big countries work, sometimes.
The way the EU is currently going? No, very much no. Europe is going quite right wing, deregulation and militarism are being pushed. A European federation would only serve corporate interests. I support our current EU membership and I’d vote against Irexit if there was a vote at the moment, but I’m not sure I’ll still hold that opinion in 10 years
Militarism in the EU is being pushed because Russia attacked Ukraine and the US is fast becoming a rival. It isn’t a choice a lot of EU countries feel they have.
Yet we do have that choice in Ireland so why would we choose to voluntarily subject ourselves to someone elses war ?
We don’t get to decide geopolitical power dynamics. We don’t get to decide threats to our sovereignty, democracy, or infrastructure. If Russia, the US, or China decide to attack Europe at any level, we don’t get to decide that. The only thing we can control is how we respond to that.
There is already hostile U.S. engagement with European political processes with the new US new National Security Strategy document which calls for “cultivating resistance” within Europe. The expanded version of this document shows that the US would like to pull 4 EU member states (Austria, Hungary, Italy and Poland) out of the European Union. It gets even worse and more worrying if you examine the political rhetoric around Europe by US admin officials and the heritage foundation.
Russia has been actively interfering through covert interference and disinformation since at least 2014. Their activities aimed at influencing democratic processes across Europe are well documented in official reports so no need to even go into that.
Who said we do? We get to decide what we do as a sovereign nation. We have no obligation to go to war because the EU is. The entire foundation of our state was built around this exact issue. We went through this entire song and dance before and we know what happened. Redmonds men got fucked over and we got nothing for it. Luckily the vast majority of people outside of a tiny echo chamber on Reddit are well able to figure this out.
We don’t have a choice, we are defenceless and have to beg the uk for help when we need it. That embarrassing and weak. We not neutral we are helpless freeloaders
Yes, we do have a choice. This is an obsession of a small few in our country that's astroturfed to hell and back online. I love when people say the line about the British. Do you think the British will not be part of any weapons buying and militarisation efforts with the EU here? Because last time we tried to get weapons to be independent from them we had to get them from Libya.
Personally, I think the wave of right wind populism will fade. It's still an issue to be sure, but I do think it won't get to a major issue. And militarism, in my opinion, at this point in time, is necessary
I think you're going to be in for a shock and it's going to be very nasty here too when the right wing populism gains a significant following due to people's unhappiness with the way things are going. With the lack of housing and infrastructure, among other problems, immigration is becoming a huge issue and a federal EU would exacerbate a problem that really ought to be rolled back a bit.
I think one of the biggest threats from right wing populists is that center-right and center parties keep trying to out-right them. Even some center left parties do it (Labour Uk, Social dems Denmark). We can already see the first bits of it creeping in to FF/FG with how they’ve started to sour on migrants and refugees recently. Fuck even SF have a bit. But you can’t out-racist the racists to keep the racists weak, all you do is make them look less insane, make them look normal. Shifting right to stop the far-right doesn’t work, it just legitimises them
Oh i absolutely recognise the threat OF the right wing populists, and i think we need to prepare however we can for it.
But I also think that a united EU could also work to stop all extremism
Why would you think that the EU, whose policies are responsible for a large increase in the support of right wing politics, is best equiped at dealing with it?
Should we just hand over all decision making to an institution that has shown itself incapable of addressing people's concerns and increases its own authority time and time again in response to the rejection of its unpopular policies?
When is enough enough? Like seriously.
Yep, the EU is pushing deregulation, and now trying to push surveillance and investor courts. I honestly no longer see a long term future in the EU with the path it’s on. I don’t believe we should leave yet, maybe there’s still a chance to save it, but at some point, the EU will push so far in prioritising economic growth and corporate interests that the economic damage caused by leaving will become less than the human damage caused by remaining.
“Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of a cancer cell”
They want to fight authoritarianism by adopting the policies of authoritarians and people are cheering it on because Russia. This of course is ignoring of course the EUs contribution in escalating tension there to the point of war, and everywhere that there is a conflict on European soil. Add in the bowing and feeble response to Trump and the escalation of lunacy in the USA then I'm not sure how giving the EU more power would somehow stand up to them. Then there is the sinophobia as if China isn't a net positive to the Irish/EU economy and that the EU isn't adopting similar policies that they criticize China for.
Ireland's economic growth came from tax policies and encouraging foreign investment which began pre-EU and which the EU wants us to end. It's also helped move some of that foreign investment out of Ireland to other states. When the country did collapse they went of their way to ensure the Irish public was responsible for the debt it didn't owe as an example to the others.
I'm all for free trade but not at expense of handing all serious political power and economic policies over to people I have no say in appointing.
The problem with spending shit tons of money on military stuff is that it begs to be used. You create a military-industrial complex and it will want to be fed. I can completely support multi-purpose defence investments. Like investing in naval and air capabilities that can be used for search and rescue, or naval/air policing, as well as for defence. I think an army or defence forces should be focused on peacekeeping, keep an army suitable for crisis response and peacekeeping missions as a standing army, anything past that should be just reservists. Invest in cybersecurity, since that would be very useful in an age of cyberwarfare, and also useful for law enforcement capabilities.
But yeah, my belief is that we should be trying to create the smallest effective military, enough to defend ourselves but not made for power projection. And we should also focus on not wasting money on military assets that may not be used by focusing on dual-use assets. Especially as an island nation, navy and air assets are far more valuable, and far easier to use for search and rescue, or policing, as well as defence
I agree. I dont know how things will pan out long term but the very fact that Trump openly supports and pushes right wing movements in Europe now undermines their credibility. America and Trump are increasingly viewed poorly in Ireland and Europe. I also think ending the American social media propaganda machine thats pushing far right/anti-immigration stuff in Europe could slow the shift in that direction.
Yeah, I think a lot has to be done about social media in general on this topic
We all grew up without social media. We turned out alright.
A United Europe must be militaristic unless you want to let Russia have Poland and let America have Denmark.
I respectfully disagree with this opinion. It isnt really militarism thats being pushed. Its defence investment that is being pushed because defence spending in many European states has been basically 0 for the last few decades. Without the US guarantee, we are defenseless to the Actual militaristic imperial power in Europe, Russia. The right wing is a reall issue and i understand the concern but it will likely exist with or without the EU. And either way the problem of the far is already coming to Ireland slowly. This is one that will be tough to tackle but its not something we can opt in or out of dealing with by leaving the EU. Also theres arguments to be made that the EU is overregulated to the point that we arent competitive in strategically important industries such as tech and green energies- almost all tech and solar companies belong to America or China. I, personally, dont want to be at their mercy for such services and products given their agressive and right wing politics.
We’d be signing up to be minnows in a very large pond.
We're already minnows in a large pond
Minnows who have a veto on may decisions in the European Council. A federal Europe wouldn’t work on the same lines.
In my opinion, its better to swim in that pond than die on the shore of it
I don’t agree with the hypothesis that Ireland or the EU is under threat from any of the actors you list. Militarily the US is stronger yes but the EU is the trading block. Money wins conflicts in the modern era. Or any era really.
Militarily, I would say Russia is a threat.
Politically, I would say the USA is a threat
And economically, I would say China is a threat
Russia in eastern Ukraine is very different to Russia turning Ireland into Airstrip One. And people seem to forget the the EU already has a common defence pact baked into the TEU.
China have no interest in tanking our economy. They like our agricultural exports and they wabt to leech off our tech industry for a while. Otherwise, the population of the entire island would only be about the 15th biggest city in China.
And the Americans are currently experiencing group psychosis under Trump but unlike the other two actors, there’ll be an election in the US in three years and he’s term limited. No other politician could hold the same sway he does over his voter base.
I think Russia is a threat to the wider existence of the EU and Europe, and as such, to Ireland imo
And I'm not confident that America wont either fall into full authoritarianism without fair elections / be silly enough to vote in more maga
How exactly and uniquely does federalisation counter that threat? And why would your response be impossible without federalisation?
The only way Russia is a threat to Europe is as a nuclear power because unless the past three years in Ukraine has been one hell of a bluff, their armed forces are woefully inadequate. And if nukes start flying, it’s all academic in any case.
Hot take.
What do you mean by that? The US is closer to a single market than the EU especially wrt financial products, operates under one language and one currency and has an economy larger than the EU afaik.
No. Not a hope.
Why not?
Too much centralised control at the top, far away from the common people. Always supported the EU but not anymore the commission are a bunch of autocrats who couldn't give a shit about the commoners of Europe. Von der Leyen and Kaja Kallas are absolute whackjobs.
Where was the EU when all along north Africa, Middle East and Ukraine was being destabilised ? I'll tell you in case you didn't know, some of it's members were cheek by jowl with the US & UK in doing the destabilising.
No
Why not?
At one time, I would’ve said yes—federal Europe is the way forward. However, it is clear that the centre and the right are kowtowing to the far right; these voices would only be amplified with a federal Europe. Ireland is incredibly lucky that we do not have a credible far right at this point. While I do believe we should come together, we should work to build our own industry and our own power base, separate from both the Americans and China and Russia. Uniting as one country will not help that and will probably hinder the process.
What point was there getting rid of the Brits just to be controlled from Brussels ?
A lot of the Federalists actually want the Brits back
Imagine being locked in a federal government with Hungary
In a referendum I'd probably vote yes, but it would depend on the articles of Federation.
What would you like to see/ not see in the articles?
Maintenance of independence of budgets, to allow for the national differences being best managed locally. Member states being permitted to contribute to defence in ways most compatible with local custom/history; like Ireland providing field medicine, mine recycling, significant things that wouldn't cause a rift in our people. Harmonisation of marriage, adoption and fostering laws.
Basically not becoming the US all over again. Oh and especially a Supreme Court, parliament and Senate with both term limits and a mandatory retirement age.
I guess right now I'm throwing stuff against a wall, if/when the time comes I'll vote according to what's presented. But I hope a Europe in that place would take the opportunity to become it's very best self.
But that first condition is damned near impossible. "Here's what you have to do, and whether it can be paid for or not is up to you"? Think about how that plays out.
It's like middle earth. Dwarves with axes, elves with bows and arrows, men on horseback...
You've lost me friend
Won't make sense if you're not familiar with the books or films but in the Lord of the Rings each race provides a certain type of soldier for their fight against Sauron. What the comment you first replied to suggested was each member state has the roles it's supposed to provide laid out in federal legislation. That's unworkable among many other things but did remind me of the LOTR franchise.
It sounds a lot like your like what exists at the moment but with a different name. I don't think a federation is necessary. We are doing things a bit differently and overall it's working. It has flaws for sure but I don't hear a compelling argument that a federal Europe would be the solution to those flaws.
I vote Miss_Kitami to be President/King/Queen.... They didn't define the title but I'd trust them.
Germany currently arming & supporting a genocide while blocking efforts to stop it. Obviously they are a sick state that has learned nothing from their history. That's who would be directing this entity.
Even worse if the UK got to join back up, would any pensioner be able to say they are against genocide within the whole EU then
Christ..
What?
Have you no moral compass at all?
Not a word about the Palestinian holocaust.
Me? Or did you mean to comment somewhere else lol
Why would I mention it in this post just asking if people would support a federal state?
[removed]
[removed]
[removed]
To be quite fair, I also am living my life. And if I think thay being a part of an EU federation will increase the quality of life for me and my family, then I will not say / advocate for that.
Im doing what I can. Thats all I can do
You could work to boycott, divest, and sanction weapons companies that are actively profiting from genocide and demand governments like Germany and the UK who both have actively participated in Palestine and without whom the genocide could not have as much political cover or literal armed support be held to account instead of begging people to offer up our entire country to them
[removed]
Do you think larger EU countries with lower standards of living are going to vote to allow you to keep yours above theirs? Our population is way too small to join a federal EU, we'd be swallowed up and have little to no say on our lives.
The same would apply to expressing our feelings on Israel, etc Europe does not support them as Ireland does. We'd be more likely to end up in situation where speaking against it is shut down as it is in Germany than the EU actually applying international law. I think you massively misunderstand the rest of Europe, particularly the countries with largest populations. I really don't want Germany, Italy and Poland deciding what Irish people can do.
I mean in my mind, Ireland would be a federal republic of the Union, and as such would be akin to a state of the US. I doubt many Californians are complaining too much about having no say in their own lives because of Texans. The only way is in federal government, but even then, the states have a good but of autonomy.
This comment / post was removed because it violates the following sub rule:
[R3] Argue in Good Faith
Everyone is here of their own volition to discuss the topic of Irish Politics. People are not here to be caught in ruthless vendetta’s of spiraling fallacies and bad faith arguments.
State your intent clearly, provide evidence to the point you want to make and engage with others arguments in much the same manner.
Trolling, Baiting, Flaming, etc are not allowed.
Excessive debate etiquette in place of an argument will be considered bad faith.
Transparent Agenda Spamming i.e. consistently posting exclusively about the same topic, will also fall under this rule.
[removed]
[removed]
[removed]
This comment / post was removed because it violates the following sub rule:
[R3] Argue in Good Faith
Everyone is here of their own volition to discuss the topic of Irish Politics. People are not here to be caught in ruthless vendetta’s of spiraling fallacies and bad faith arguments.
State your intent clearly, provide evidence to the point you want to make and engage with others arguments in much the same manner.
Trolling, Baiting, Flaming, etc are not allowed.
Excessive debate etiquette in place of an argument will be considered bad faith.
Transparent Agenda Spamming i.e. consistently posting exclusively about the same topic, will also fall under this rule.
This comment / post was removed because it violates the following sub rule:
[R3] Argue in Good Faith
Everyone is here of their own volition to discuss the topic of Irish Politics. People are not here to be caught in ruthless vendetta’s of spiraling fallacies and bad faith arguments.
State your intent clearly, provide evidence to the point you want to make and engage with others arguments in much the same manner.
Trolling, Baiting, Flaming, etc are not allowed.
Excessive debate etiquette in place of an argument will be considered bad faith.
Transparent Agenda Spamming i.e. consistently posting exclusively about the same topic, will also fall under this rule.
This comment / post was removed because it violates the following sub rule:
[R3] Argue in Good Faith
Everyone is here of their own volition to discuss the topic of Irish Politics. People are not here to be caught in ruthless vendetta’s of spiraling fallacies and bad faith arguments.
State your intent clearly, provide evidence to the point you want to make and engage with others arguments in much the same manner.
Trolling, Baiting, Flaming, etc are not allowed.
Excessive debate etiquette in place of an argument will be considered bad faith.
Transparent Agenda Spamming i.e. consistently posting exclusively about the same topic, will also fall under this rule.
Are you describing the EU as a 'fascist, genocidal organisation'?
It quite literally is both of those things, definitively.
This comment / post was removed because it violates the following sub rule:
[R2] Respect Others
Debate the topic, not the person.
Personal insults, abusive or hostile language — whether aimed at other users or public figures — will not be tolerated.
You can challenge ideas, but you must do so constructively.
This comment / post was removed because it violates the following sub rule:
[R2] Respect Others
Debate the topic, not the person.
Personal insults, abusive or hostile language — whether aimed at other users or public figures — will not be tolerated.
You can challenge ideas, but you must do so constructively.
No chance. Most European countries would sell Ireland out for a deal with the USA. When Europe stops licking the boots of a rapist ,bully then possibly . Otherwise its a federation of lapdogs. Current leaders are a joke, teaching our kids to stand up to bullies , while they bend over for a $ .
The whole point of Federation is so we have the strength to hit the rapist back. Keeping Europe divided garauntees that we stay beneath Russia and America.
Nein
no it wont change anythign, theres a reaosn why Austraia and hungary empire failed now expand that to a 100.
Ireland postion in europe will be the same as a federal europe nothing will matter ur life wont change.
im sorry to bring the bad news but it will just cause more problems than its worth it.
shure would it be good for the army yesr but will it benefit u in the long run probalay not!
How many countries have 20+ languages?
Multilingual countries like India etc usually have 1-3 languages that 95% have some proficiency in.
Indonesia and Malaysia are both massively multilingual countries. And most people in Europe would speak at least one of English, French, or German.
English would be the lingua franca as it is now. The French would never, ever stop giving out about it though lmao
No
Like others have said, I have some concerns about any move towards centralisation as it traditionally comes at a measurable cost to liberty, democratic pluralism, local autonomy, etc. I don’t think nation states have to be defined so rigidly like they were before… the nation state is evolving and the EU is a really interesting example of that. Regardless, the status quo is unsustainable, and urgent reform is required in Europe. I’ll re post this from another thread because it sums up my position:
People think about this far too black and white. Why is the conversation an either/ or between the status quo and a fully fledged federation? Here are a few things I would be in favour of that are gaping structural disadvantages for Europe versus China, the US, and other economic powers:
• Remove internal barriers/ tariffs (Current internal trade barriers are equivalent to a 44% tariff between EU members.)
• Contingency planning for unified EU defence. Doesn’t have to be a single army, but coordinated command structures, integrated procurement, shared R&D, and interoperability by default. This just means economies of scale and vastly improved security in times of crisis, if shit ever completely hits the fan. This means militaries can easily combine forces and scale up rapidly without too much hassle. This cannot happen today.
• Unified capital markets union
• Centralised cybersecurity and intelligence sharing
• Fully integrated energy union
• Sector-specific unified industrial policy (Semiconductors, pharmaceuticals, critical resources, etc.)
• Permanent fiscal capacity, i.e. a permanent EU debt instrument, not ad-hoc crisis improvisation.
• Unified digital infrastructure, including EU developed cloud infrastructure for all EU public services. As well as aggressive use of EU standards to shape global markets
• Governance changes when it comes to foreign policy/ strategic decision making including sanctions, and security decisions. End single state veto power in strategic decision making. Pre-authorised emergency competences at EU level with automatic triggers instead of improvised summits.
There are lots of things that can be done, while ensuring our national identities remain intact and that sovereignty is traded off proportionally. There are lots more things I haven’t even listed. These things don’t have to happen overnight either… but we need some sort of vision for Europe in this changing world. We don’t have any vision for progress at a national or European level whatsoever. Do we want to be a US lapdog or a Chinese lapdog, unable to protect our sovereignty, industry, tech, rights, our welfare state, etc.? Do we want our society to emulate/ converge with the China or the US model, or do we want the capacity to choose our own path and remain in control of our own decisionmaking?
I'd like a better class of federalist tbh. The most passionate Germans etc wouldn't dream of saying that.
I'm not wrong though?
Listen i love my country, but im not going to lie and say that before the EU it was a fine place to live, or that it was economically stronger.
It was far worse before the EU
I don't mean to make too much hay out of it, but the difference between saying it wasn't economically stronger before and it was pretty much nothing, is like the difference between 1 and 0.
Well I suppose I may have wrote that part in haste (tbf i wrote the whole post while on the bus, so im surprised most of it actually is coherent). I didnt truly mean to say that it was NOTHING, thats on me. My bad bro
We had great social cohesion, better housing, a better healthcare regime, better education... Ireland today is the poorest rich nation around.
Here's a thread from today.
This is all going to continue to worsen.
Between Chat control and Von Der Leyen's response to the Palestinian genocide, my faith in the EU has plummeted to the lowest it's ever been.
I'd be in favour of tighter integration if we could get the fundamentals right. But federalisation, probably not.
It's also a kick in the teeth to Mick and everybody that fought for us to be independent. The EU just aren't trustworthy right now and maybe never will be.
No
Would need to know more about it. My gut says no.
Not at all. Von Der Leyen and the hypocrisy over Gaza and the USA has turned me against the EU.
Far too few comments like this.
'We have enemies all around' same rationale always used to brow beat people into something ultimately bad.
We have always been at war with Eurasia.
Absolutely not. It flies in the face of why members joined. The early members joined to work together, while retaining their independence. They had spent a lot of history trying to take over each other, fighting wars over it. The EEC allowed them to end all of that. The newer members were expressing their freedom by joining the EU and getting away from a centralised power. So all members are now able to work together and retain full independence. The irony is that what you are asking is should we all join together under one entity to ensure that we don't all come together under one entity. We don't want Ukraine being dragged into one entity and trying to ensure it doesn't happen. The one thing the EU proves is that we can cooperate without being under one power. Let's keep it that way.
Yes. Absolutely. It’s becoming clearer and clearer that the US is a threat to Europe and that includes us. Some think we are somehow immune to attack which is ironic given our history. Europe is stronger together.
I agree 100%!
No. We don't want to be a part of another failing empire.
Absolutely not. Once war starts blow up the data centers and cut the cables. Roll in the roads and sit tight.
No I'd rather leave the EU than be apart of a federal Europe
My issue with this question is that we have not even defined what a federal EU will be in practice, rather its just the term not the minutia and nuts and bolts of what will make of the federation and how to get nations to accept that. Issues like a common language that countries will agree to (good luck getting France to sign up if its not French), common military and defence (good luck getting Ireland, Austria, and Spain to work with that), common currency and financial policy (Southern vs Northern EU fiscal policies and the countries opposed to joining the Eurozone), policy regarding national identity vs EU identity, non-EU immigration and citizenship (Eastern Europe vs Western Europe, and the movement of people), the amount of power an EU wide elected body to be the highest chamber of governance (Small nations fear being sold out by big nations, big nations fear being ganged up by the smaller nations), and the status of non-recognised sub-national identities in Europe (Bretons and Basques in France, Catalans in Spain, Roma in various states etc), how do you handle the right of countries or subnational regions to leave the federation.
The issue is if you give so many opt outs to make a federal EU happen with countries accepting it then you end up with a weakened federal EU that is a slightly more integrated EU at the moment which solves none of the problems, otherwise you need countries to accept policies they are against to get countries to join which is realistically not going to happen.
Ultimately I think the EU will not federalise because there is so many hurdles to overcome and instead will remain primarily a trading block, as the EU in the manner it has evolved and expanded since the early 2000's has made itself fundamentally incapable of the radical reform needed to federalise given the amount of opt outs and the disparity in policies between nations.
No. We're supposed to be neutral.
Generations past fought for an independent Irish republic free from Britain. And a federal Europe means losing our independence and ruled from Brussels. Ireland will simply be another province. Our republic is special.
The 20th century saw the death, resurrection, and death again of empire. The 21st century will likely follow in that, with the post-WWII American empire entering a period of decline and (unless something radical changes there) eventual irrelevance. If things continue on the current trajectory, then some sort of European state will be necessary in the coming decades to prevent European countries being swallowed up by aggressive, non-European powers (and descending into petty, regional squabbles).
I agree. Imo, its necessary for Europe's, and Ireland’s, survival
Yes. Because I see it as a necessary stepping stone to a united humanity eventually. It will be slow and painful and we may end up in climate/nuclear annihilation before then but I would like to see a post-scarcity, united human society.
Capitalism divides humanity more than anything else. A neoliberal, genocidal alliance will do the opposite of what you intend.
Yk what, I never thought about it like that. But hell yeah man, i agree
I'd prefer a Europe of a thousand Liechtensteins. It would soon become the envy of the world.
Where are you on the best recorded genocide in history?
How do you think we should overcome this? Nuremberg trials?
Absolutely not. Never, ever, ever. No surrender.
Now, if it was a socialist federation? Sure.
Maybe some version, but the way the EU is now is gridlock, hypocrisy and an embarrassment
You're alright, thanks.
I don't particularly want a future where my grandsons are conscripted by our German overlords to go die in a war for Israel or corporate interests.
Geopolitically we have to.
Europe does.
And this isn’t the typical Reddit melodrama.
But if you look at a map. And population. And GDP. And resources, you got the militant Russia in the East, and the ever more unpredictable America with military assets already in Europe.
Best case America just isolates from Europe, worst case America cosies up to Russia.
If Europe is divided then you have different factions siding with which ever great power they’re feeling at that time.
But a united European Union has just under 450 million people, many highly skilled, highly educated and a very strong power bloc.
Germany or France can’t compete with Russia or America or China by itself
But a more centralised EU can.
Yes
Fuck off
Jesus
Aggressive 😭
The EU is basically evolving into that. You won't be ruled by Bejing, Moscow, or DC. You'l be ruled by the EU. Ireland isn't an international player in anything beyond our tax benefits for American companies.
I'd much rather be ruled by an elected Chancellor in Brussels than any of the other states, yk
There is another option. Unheard of. Rule yourself. You have a government why add another?
We're simply to small and controllable imo. I'd rather be in a steong nation and have a say by electing government that way than a small one that cant compete
Mostly yes, in theory.
Not sure I agree that Europe is hated though. Russia and the USA are basket cases, can't be doing things based on their collective mental illnesses. I don't think we should act out of fear, only if it's a genuinely progressive movement in its own right.
I don't think China "hates" us. Not in the deranged Russian/American way at least.
It's a big world like.
It's funny how irl I literally never hear Irish people support or express any interest in these Federalist fantasies. You would think on Reddit everyone here is begging for the EU to liberate us from democracy and make us an unsinkable aircraft carrier.
A federal europe is a dream from people who miss their countries empire and only see combining europe to achieve a return to that glory
The former big colonial powers are failing since they moved to neoliberalism and their spoils are drying up. They are desperate for vassals.
No, too much different historical contexts adding to different ideas , never work.
Yea though, would be more efficient in theory
Why do you think Brexit was a thing?
It amazes me how these fanatical federalists are consistently doing more to legitimise Irexit with the population than any group pushing it.
If there was Nice or Lisbon type vote tomorrow the same people would be telling people who voted no that slippery slope arguments are conspirational. When in reality these are the very people out oiling up that slope.
Yes, the world is changing rapidly. A federated EU would be a counterweight to US, Russia and China.
[removed]
This comment / post was removed because it violates the following sub rule:
[R3] Argue in Good Faith
Everyone is here of their own volition to discuss the topic of Irish Politics. People are not here to be caught in ruthless vendetta’s of spiraling fallacies and bad faith arguments.
State your intent clearly, provide evidence to the point you want to make and engage with others arguments in much the same manner.
Trolling, Baiting, Flaming, etc are not allowed.
Excessive debate etiquette in place of an argument will be considered bad faith.
Transparent Agenda Spamming i.e. consistently posting exclusively about the same topic, will also fall under this rule.
Only if it is a federal union of soviets.
Totalitarian speedrun
Not a chance in hell.
So much partitionist thinking on here. A United Ireland would have a Million plus British population who all would want to be in NATO. Time for us defenceless freeloaders to man up.
I dont see the point. The EU works well as a bunch of independent countries seding aspects of their sovereignty in the name of economic cooperation. What would a federation actually achieve that the latter model couldnt? Defense spending and obligations is perhaps the most obvious answer, but again that can be addressed by international cooperation and treaties, which Ireland has made a point of avoiding.
I dont want to be governed by a vast, unpredictable, and frankly far more right wing continental electorate either. It would either end up as an American polarized two party system, or a bunch of self interested nationalist parties working together and backstabbing each other where somehow France, Germany and maybe Poland always get their way. I suppose it depends on the federal model this would pursue, but those are the obvious pitfalls i can forsee.
Absolutely not. I would support a mutual defence association and an actually open market, free movement for citizens and that's it. No migration pacts, no tax synchronisation, no regulatory enforcement.
I can see the appeal of joining together with close partners into a new monolith rather than being ruled by a foreign monolith
If I was convinced we'd come to that kind of either or point, I suppose my support would come down to things like whether or not it looked like the proposed system would still allow smaller members like us to put our foot down on red-line issues when it really mattered
If there were safeguards for smaller member-states, yes, probably
Yes
100%
Absolutely, and I think it’s crucial for the future, unfortunately I doubt the population overall would agree, and we can be very shortsighted in this country
The extreme left and right in Ireland don’t like the EU because it has raised living standards here exponentially. They want people moaning and complaining, not rich. Russia and the MAGA USA don’t like the EU because makes Europe stronger and supports democracy and it stands for the rule of law.
EU needs more integration to be relevant I think. This is difficult because you have fifth columnists like Viktor Obran trying to undermine the coherence of the bloc
The same Orban who as a young man was instrumental in the collapse of the Iron Curtain !! But you knew that, yeah !
He is too conservative for my liking but he is a man who knows exactly what foreign interference is therefore he knows what the EU is becoming and guess what he has the 'audacity' to stand up for the interests of his own country.
The same guy who is a whore to Russia yeah? the same guy who uses EU funds to to give to family members yeah? the same guy who cracks down on independent media in Hungary? if Hungary is attractive to live I suggest you talk to many of the hundreds of thousands of young Hugarians who have fled over seas from the rule of that tyrant
yes
i would like to see massive reform to be more democratic (no vetos, population based seat allocation/voting) but the way the world is going i will take a "not perfect" federal EU over our current standing.
i think it will take something truly insane to happen (like idk, trump invading greenland) for the average voter to realise that "neutrality" is a terrible idea, and we need to be in military alliances with our allies
So you would like to see countries like Ireland, Denmark, and Portugal, have effectively no say in the running of the EU.
I agree. Definitely removing the veto is a huge thing for me. And of course, just generally more democratic
Sadly, I can see Trump going for Greenland
Yep. We're demonstrably shit at governing ourselves.
And the EU isn't? Lol
I think a more federal EU is a good way to do wealth taxes
Yes. I think it should start with a federation of core states that stays within the EU and slowly expands, like a final level of integration. For example, Benelux+France+Germany to start with, then integrate Ireland,Italy, Spain and Portugal and so on. I see myself as a European first and foremost. Europe is my home, not any particular nation state.
Are you not Bolivian?
No. That name is a pun totally unrelated to the country of Bolivia
Bar leaving the country with out a visa I don't see how EU helps and most people emigrate away from the EU.Free travel to EU doesn't seem what it used to be when they have similar or worse problems.The likes of Poland staying in the EU while saying no to EU policies is ideally where we want to be.Burnimg bridges with America and shaking hands with china while there is an ongoing joke of Comrade Connelly as president is not helping.Sure most of the time we go to Europe it's 3-4 hours away and people spend 2 weeks max on holidays I'd leave and a hard no to Federal EU.We need our American brothers and we are becoming friends with nefarious countrys and our president is very quiet for my liking.
I think if there is to be an EU at all in the long term things are going to have to go that way. It would need to be very highly federated though - most decisions would need to remain the jurisdiction of national parliaments. Having a unified system for issues like Foreign/Extra-Union Affairs, Defence, Security, certain areas of direct taxation to pay for it alongside the trade jurisdiction the EU already has would benefit all of us though, especially given that NATO seems to have given up the ghost. It is a long term thing though, a lot of things and attitudes would need to change to make this work.