Is Europe Disintegrating?

You can&#x27;t have short-term, mass migration without having something happen or change. We will see a huge change in European political landscape within the next few years. People have to slowly assimilate into a culture in order to allow for a gradual, peaceful change in that culture. Shocking these types of systems with any sort of migration is a recipient for instability.<p>Please keep in mind that this isn&#x27;t any sort of stupid anti-Muslim rhetoric, just a geopolitical observation. I think if you look at the United States you&#x27;ll see a model of Muslim integration.

No.<p>Pro EU sentiment increased markedly in pretty much all of Europe post-Brexit[1], and hopefully national politicians will stop playing the silly &quot;do bad&#x2F;unpopular things and then blame them on the EU&quot;-game.<p>This game was thought to be without cost, now it is clear that it is not, and the ones who played it most extensively are paying the biggest price.<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.theguardian.com&#x2F;world&#x2F;2016&#x2F;jul&#x2F;08&#x2F;brexit-causes-resurgence-in-pro-eu-leanings-across-continent" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.theguardian.com&#x2F;world&#x2F;2016&#x2F;jul&#x2F;08&#x2F;brexit-causes-...</a>

Europe is learning the same thing that the United States did in its early days: it&#x27;s impossible for a union of disparate states to survive without strong, overarching federal authority. It&#x27;s as unpalatable to member states now as it was to the original colonies, but the alternative is to be subsumed by some outside, more centrally organized power. The Russians understand this, which is why they work to encourage nationalism among EU members. Once the infighting has weakened everyone, they can swoop into the vacuum and become this central authority.

European Union is not working because too many different economies are in the eurozone. I was a fervent Pro-EU, now realising a federation of independent countries might work better than a superstate.

It most definitely is and it takes a very starry eyed sort of person to expect otherwise. The idea that 20 or so different people with different languages, religions, mores, histories, frames of reference, economies could somehow achieve monetary or much less political union under the rule of an un-elected and un-accountable bureaucracy of &quot;commissioners&quot; who rule by means of &quot;directives&quot; (you couldn&#x27;t make it sound more soviet-y even if you tried) was beyond ludicrous from day 1. A modest trade union with some freedom of movement for qualified workers was achievable and maybe in the end it will settle to just that. In fact I think the soviety approach to building the whole thing ensured its demise. Diverse people can collaborate productively and profitably under win-win free market arrangements. But in the EU system there&#x27;s too many zero-sum games being constantly played and decided on a purely political level (rather than by market forces) and that creates a lot of bad blood pretty quickly. The reluctance of Germans to bail out southern Europeans is just an instance of that.

Based on the following graph[1], yes. If the UK has voted to leave the with an EU favourability rating of 44, Greece at 27 and France at 38 will not be far behind.<p>[1](<a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.pewglobal.org&#x2F;2016&#x2F;06&#x2F;07&#x2F;euroskepticism-beyond-brexit&#x2F;pm_2016-06-07_brexit-00&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.pewglobal.org&#x2F;2016&#x2F;06&#x2F;07&#x2F;euroskepticism-beyond-br...</a>)

Based on my recent experience of visiting Europe - yes, it is. I stayed mostly in France, was there during the Brexit vote, and everyone I spoke to was pretty keen on exiting the EU, voting right-wing, and seeing it all crumble. They also have several separatist movements, especially in Brittany, which seems to be more anti-EU than anti-French...

The EU and its member states will have to adapt. If they don&#x27;t then yes: Disintegration and a return to rampant nationalism might be the consequence.<p>The EU in its current incarnation as a centralised, geographically-defined bloc could be considered a relic of colonial, pre-globalization times (as much as nation states are a remnant of pre-industrial, pre-Information Age times).<p>In order to be able to address the issues of the 21st century we need a much more decentralised structure, more devolution of government to the local level and more cooperation between these decentralised entities.<p>Large cities in different countries and their respective populations often have much more in common than people from rural regions have in common with these city dwellers (as evidenced by Brexit). Yet through arbitrary national borders they&#x27;re simply lumped together. The same applies to border regions. Why shouldn&#x27;t companies and other organisations from different countries be able to work closer together more easily?<p>Finally, why should organisations such as the EU be defined in terms of geography instead of in terms of shared values? As of now, Canada for instance would be a much better fit to the EU economically and in terms of values than some of the Eastern European member states.<p>There are a few interesting articles about this subject and &#x27;neo-medieval&#x27; overlapping authorities and multiple identities as a possible outcome:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.newscientist.com&#x2F;article&#x2F;mg22329850-600-end-of-nations-is-there-an-alternative-to-countries&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.newscientist.com&#x2F;article&#x2F;mg22329850-600-end-of-n...</a><p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;stratechery.com&#x2F;2016&#x2F;the-brexit-possibility&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;stratechery.com&#x2F;2016&#x2F;the-brexit-possibility&#x2F;</a><p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;fieldnotes.mike-walsh.com&#x2F;brexit-and-the-rise-of-the-city-state-d501a0354773#.y8yl3190c" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;fieldnotes.mike-walsh.com&#x2F;brexit-and-the-rise-of-the...</a>

&gt; What Orbán has done, for example in his takeover of the media, undermines democracy itself.<p>Those of us who actually lived in Hungary know that the media needs to be regulated to prevent the media from picking our next president.<p>Orbán was the first politician who had the balls to call out the West on their irresponsible immigration policy, while everyone else was too busy being politically correct. The Austrian media blasted him, however when Austria started doing the same exact thing, they reported it differently.<p>Look at the Buzzfeed &quot;reporting&quot;: they knew the document was most likely fake, yet they decided to publish it anyway.

Integrating all countries of eastern Europe at once and much too early was the beginning of the end. The countries that had been members before were getting so close economically and culturally that I think the current situation would not have been possible and a real united state might not have been only a dream. Politicians wanted too much and too early and did not take the population with them. I love my polish colleagues, but on a macro scale it did not really work.

I feel very weird that most of my recent comments have been book recommendations, never the less, as usual peripherally related. And yes, i know Europe is not a nation. Hence peripherally. :) <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.amazon.com&#x2F;Why-Nations-Fail-Origins-Prosperity&#x2F;dp&#x2F;0307719227" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.amazon.com&#x2F;Why-Nations-Fail-Origins-Prosperity&#x2F;d...</a>

I really hope this rise of Nationalism is just a phase. If not it won&#x27;t end well for Europe and the world.

Interesting article. I do believe that the EU will collapse, and that it is only a matter of time. First of all, there is not a single instance in History where a common currency, such as the Euro, succeeded. It always has collapsed. Different people in France have developed about this exact subject.<p>I believe that more and more people are in favor of existing the EU. In the case of France, the first thing that people need to understand, is that a referendum was held in 2005 in France, and that the people have been asked if they wanted to integrate the EU. The No won by over 55%. Even though, Sarkozy signed the treaty and put France into the EU.<p>EDIT: People also realize that people who run for presidency, only present a program that is actually the program of the EU... In the case of France, there are some specific laws and orientations that the EU is trying to push on the country, on different areas, such a Work law, or GMO. Those laws goes against what generations and generations of people fought for. Other people who run for president also put in their program stuff that would go against the EU program, and that is NOT APPLICABLE. If those were applied, the country would be fined heavily by the EU. Which I think, makes those politics either liers, or incompetents.<p>The second thing is that more and more people realize that the way it works isn&#x27;t sustainable, and this for a simple reason; having 28 countries together, who have to obey to the same set of rules (EU treaties), in different area such as Education, Immigration, Finance, Farming, etc... is not possible. Why? Because the interest of Estonia in Immigration are totally different than France&#x27;s interests in that same area. Italy interests in finance are different than UK, etc... You cannot apply the same rules to everybody.<p>A simple metaphor to understand the problem is this: - If you own your own house, you can do whatever you want and paint your outside walls as you like. - If you own an apartment in a 6 stories building, you probably wont have the freedom to put whatever window you want on it, and there will be a few rules that every story of the building will have to follow. - Now take a building with 28 stories, is it now harder to make everyone happy? or easier?<p>If there is a leak under the roof, the owner of the last story will be mad and will want to do something about it. However, it won&#x27;t be the others owners&#x27; priority to fix that. If the first floor has an issue of recurrent flooding, the people for the above stories won&#x27;t have that as a priority either...<p>Now, if you want to modify the European treaty, you must have the unanimity of all its members. How is that possible, knowing that each country does not have the same interests&#x2F;concerns, in any area? It&#x27;s not. And this is probably why UK tried to negotiate with the EU on a different set of topics, before actually holding the referendum.<p>Not to mention that countries who are not in the EU, but are in Europe, are doing way better on a lot of aspects, than countries who are part of the EU. A lot of novel prices of economy also stood up and explained that the EU will collapse, and one of them even resigned from the BCE (Banque Centrale Europeenne), and joined a French political party who wants France to get out of the EU, using the Article 50 of the treaty.

&gt; For now there is crisis and disintegration wherever I look: the eurozone is chronically dysfunctional, sunlit Athens is plunged into misery, young Spaniards with doctorates are reduced to serving as waiters in London or Berlin, the children of Portuguese friends seek work in Brazil and Angola<p>How much truth is there, to this statement i.e. &quot;young Spaniards with PHDs are serving as Waiters in London or Berlin.&quot;<p>Anyone? I find it quite shocking and want to know if the Author is engaging in fear-mongering, or if Europe is indeed falling apart and the part about Greeks, young Spaniards and Portuguese peeps is true.

As long as austerity is enforced under the eu-mark the disintegration is a certainty.<p>The only way it could be saved would be to jettison the euro or at least the convergence criteria. Germany doesn&#x27;t seem keen on a succesful EU, perhaps there&#x27;s some underlaying anger over those last couple of attemps to ruin Europe. One can only guess.

edit: -deleted- this thread has been moved from the front-page, back 5 pages. There is no point making (nor leaving) good arguments in dead threads that no one can see nor take part in.