Average AMERICAN REACTS To 'History of the European Union'
Vložit
- čas přidán 8. 07. 2020
- Today we take a look at a video by Geo History! I have very little knowledge of the EU so I was excited to react to this video and learn a few things. Thank you so much for watching!
*Facebook* ~~ / menkeusa
*Instagram* ~~ / menkeusa
*Discord* ~~ / discord
*Patreon* ~~ / menke
**Gear**(affiliate links)
-Lighting | IVISII | amzn.to/3eJLSp8
-Microphone | Audio-Technica | amzn.to/3hh0NbP
-Microphone Stand | Innogear | amzn.to/39dN3vV
-Microphone Shock Mount | Btoop | amzn.to/2ZGOEXI
-Audio Interface | Presonus | amzn.to/39jJR1F
-Camera | Nikon Z6 | amzn.to/2CQiJeu
-4k Capture Card | Elgato | amzn.to/2WCcbXP
Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use.
![소통은 원래 안 되는 게 정상이다? | 최재천 이화여자대학교 석좌교수 [작가생각 S04E04]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/BriTX-L69Y8/mqdefault.jpg)
The reason that France vetoed the entry of the UK, is that France & the rest of the EU always wanted to move towards an ever closer union. The UK wanted the benefits of the single market, but never really wanted a true Union. Once the UK joined, it regularly tried stop several integration projects. This is also the reason for Brexit.
Which I always found ironic as a Brit because you can't really have the economic benefits without the integration, especially on the laws, regulations and rules, harmonizing is needed to allow a freer flow of trade of people, goods and services, otherwise walls would go up.
That's something a lot of people don't seem to understand and confuse free trade deals with the single market and custom union which they are quite different, a free trade deal is a restrictive deal whereas single market and custom union is more or less like trade is in a single country which is far better.
It's also the reason why we see with all the trade deals the UK is signing up, it's not coming close to replacing what the UK lost with its access to the EU market.
UK thinking to bend EU to their empire idea. Didnot work out.
It boggles my mind that people seem to think that the EU can just implement huge decisions on its own, every single big EU decision has been approved by its members democratically elected government. It can not even do so if 25 out of 26 of the members agree everybody has to agree or nothing happens until everyone agrees.
I dont like this everyone-has-to-agree policy. We need a majority decision policy in Order to Make it more modern and flexible.
I love the open borders in Europe. Makes me proud to be European, and makes life easy for me over there.
hell yeh! hi5 from Portugal!
Totally agree
@@ruicorreia6373 in estonia we buy cheap beer from latvia lol
Agreed from Sweden
and we get cheap beer from Germany :)
As a young EU citizen having travelled, studied and lived in different European countries, I feel that our common values are stronger than any cultural differences between us. Together we are stronger. The history of this continent is one of numerous wars, battles, and human life loss. It is the first time in history that so many countries came together to work for a common goal instead of fighting.
In this increasingly globalized world we would have no chance as small countries alone. Together we form the largest consumer market in the world, so we are able to demand that anyone trading with us be in line with our very strict standards. Smaller member countries with big bully neighbours outside of the union are safer than ever.
Even during this pandemic, we still enjoy our universal healthcare, most of the business are helped with funds from the EU, and the majority of workers staying at home still get their monthly salary from the state, which is also EU funded. That would be extremely difficult for stronger economies in Europe and completely impossible for smaller ones. The EU has already secured 400 million Covid vaccines for its more vulnerable part of the population, even before the vaccine is ready. Oh, and that would be free as well. The response is not perfect, but we are certainly in a better place than most other countries in the world right now.
Open borders have boosted trade between countries. But it is only for EU citizens. For non-EU citizens each country has its own policy regarding immigration.
EU is something new, it is only 30 years old but has already done a lot that was never done in the millenia of history in this continent. It needs improvement for sure, it goes through crisises and it has flaws that each one of us knows. One thing is for sure, we are strong together, but insignificant alone.
Totally agree with you bro! There are only two types of countries in Europe: those too small and those which did not yet realize they are too small to compete in globalized word.
I think Many people forget why the EU exists in the First Place.
To prevent us from Killing each other again.
@@vinz4066 And for us that are part of the EU, it worked.
@@giulioascari214 Absolutely true
Some of the oldest civilizations in our continent and in the world reaching agreements and understanding each other excluding war and working only on safety for all and progression, education, human rights, culture is something to be proud of for me.
Overall the EU is a blessing for EU members, but each country has its own laws and policies and that leads to a lot of arguments. Migration crisis is surely one of them, but also financial policies, healthcare, taxes....
"Having open border could lead to some problems..."
The United States of America... you have open borders between states...
but yeah, I guess it leads to problems...
You can think of the EU as a "wannabe federation" so having closed borders in the EU would be the same as having closed borders between the states of the US.
The reason for UK having troubles with joining is the fact that England has always followed a separate trajectory from Continental Europe.
From the imperial vs metric, from common law in Britain to Civil Code in Continental Europe, there are many gaps to cover
And the Brits were ultimately on the "wrong side" of the French Revolution :D ... from which the British people suffer to this day.
Are you talking about England or Britain, the two are not interchangeable
@@lucylane7397 I am not using then interchangeably. I am talking about both.
Just look at Brexit referendum.
Northern Ireland and Scotland voted remain, England voted leave
the "no border" thing is rly like no borders between american states, you dont realise u are in another country when you drive on the highway you just see it when u realise the signs changed language xD as someone who was born in it its just amazing and i cant imagine having it gone, driving trough the EU is totaly normal like for someone in texas driving to north dacota, imagin u woukld have borders between every state ... horrible xD
as the EU is ONE big trade apperatus, there is no need for borders inside the EU as long as there are borders on the outside.
even NON EU members like switzerland and such are in schengen
think of the EU as a not that "unites" states xD like united states with more individual states with more rights on the federal level.
and you can sometimes hear the borders when your car suddenly drives on different kinds of pavements
For some countries, like Greece, in the beginning of their entry in 1981 until recently, it was impossible to drive freely to the other EU member states because the countries neighbouring Greece were not members yet and most, if all of them, were under dictatorship and later on under extreme poverty, which made their roads not accessible and not safe to drive. Now that Bulgaria is a member, and I hope the entire Balkan peninsula one day, is much easier to enjoy the freedom of movement without having to take an airplane.
@@KateDenthimamai 👍👍
At the time, the USA were fight to gain over our market and increase our military and economic dependence. France was very wary of where this could go. If you look at now, there is little agricultural exchange between the US and the EU, because Europe built a very safe agricultural policy that does not allow many things the US did. It was more to defend the European economy than against Americans really. And by the time the U.K. entered (meaning they would have veto rights on new policies), most of the measures that could prevent the US from abusing the European economy were in place.
Also, feel proud of the European project. I hope we can continue to improve our relationship on the old continent. The EU made the 70 year peace that never happened in Europe before, possible.
Victor e : Oh, deluded one, the EU gave you 70 years of peace! Never in your life!
EU was founded in 1993!
The "Common Market" started in 1957 which has nothing to do with security!
What a falsehood you are peddling.
We, in England, believed that we were joining a "Common Market" a trading partnership, nothing that followed was voted for!
The EU wanted an EU Super Army and this was not known or voted for!
Germany told France that we should all relinquish the command of our own Armies and all be under the rule of the EU, the nodding poodle agreed.
Just like 1938!
You are either ignorant of these facts, which is understandable, considering the hype that the EU pumps out or you are wantonly spreading these falsehoods!
Just to make it completely clear, the EU has done nothing for the security of Europe and wouldn't be capable of doing so if two factions decided to let slip the dogs of war!
@@Loki1815 Ok, you are technically right, the EU predecessors were the ones that started all of this 70 years ago, all of this became the EU in 1993, but this doesn't change the fact, that deeper European cooperation started back than and not just in 1993. And of course it is connected to "security", because it finally ended the big rivaly between France and Germany (among other, smaller ones).
Of course the EU is not the only reason; amongst other little factors, the Cold War brought all of the countries together as well, in order to stand together against the Soviet threat. And that was a huge factor. But the EU created a more serious and stable form to it anyways.
Your EU super army stuff is BS.
Yes, Germany is pushing the topic of an united European defense force forward. This is one of the logical next steps in a union. While I agree, that this is propably not the most urgent thing to implement to the EU, because many way more important things need to be done first, Russias activities connected to the Ukraine / Crimea situation and the increasing worries of the Baltic members with Russia and increasing reliability problems with our allies (USA) called for it. It would be our best option to increase our defensive capabilities by joining them together. This would also strengthen our NATO contribution as a whole and reduce or dependency on the USA in the future. I doubt this will work out though, because backwards thinking nationalists in all member countries don't want this to happen. All big changes in the union did take their time to move forward and this one will take a long time for sure.
@@Loki1815 A common market absolutely has to do with peace. Economic interdependence deincentivizes physical warfare, this isn't exactly a hard concept to grasp.
To explain a little more why france vetoed the UK: Charles de Gaules was wary of the US influence as he saw the world nearing a confrontation between the US and the USSR. And he wanted Europe to be a third block, strong enough to be independent. So he did not want Europe to be under the political influence of the US or the USSR and that's why he vetoed the UK
@@Loki1815 Imagin calling someone deluded and then proceed to show you don't even know the basic facts about the matter. Try to grow up mate.
14:25 I wouldn't wanna remind you how high the US's national debt is....
Of course, there always be part of society opposing EU within EU-there is no such like a perfect system and EU is ofc far from perfection. But generally most people do appreciate European Union. As you mentioend in your video, all countries have different cultures, languages and creating an easier access to them(before covid I could go for a weekend to italy for a total price of 30 EURO a flight there and back..insanely cheap and easy to travel ), creates more open minded people from an early age. The only way how to create peace is to accept our differenes, not ignore them, coz ignorance will lead one day to a big blow up. The generation before me sees borders, my generation sees EU as a big dysfunctional family, but a family.
I agree the most with the last sentence. We are a dysfunctional family but I wouldnt change it for anything.
Estonian here: the open borders benefit us in many ways but many estonians now buy cheap beer from latvia :)
Before corona you could traval totally free inside the Schengen Zone (does not include all EU members). Sometimes you barely noticed crossing a border.
I know that you uploaded this a while ago, but still felt I needed to respond, because I think the video you watched leaves some really important stuff out.
So, nowadays the main argument used in favour of the EU is about economics (our economies will be stronger together) and I think the video explains that side of the story really well. However, during the forties and fifties the argument for European countries working closer together wasn’t about building wealth, it was about building peace. The most important goal of European cooperation was to make sure something like the Second World War would never happen again. Rebuilding Europe economically was one of the means to accomplish that, not the end.
Today we tend to focus on the economic side, because war in (Western) Europe has basically become unthinkable, but I think it is very important to understand that when this whole process started that definitely wasn’t the case.
Totally with you pal! We always forget that the drive for a united Europe stemmed from the ruins of 2 devastating Word Wars, which wreaked havoc economically and politically on the continent, leading to millions of internal refugees.
Now the shadows of another war seemed to have disappered (ask Ukraine and Bosnia anwyay), but in a globalized words we are much stronger together. The point would be getting to a really federal systems and get rid of the overpowering influence of Governments.
it was mentioned at the beginning of the video though.
The EU was essentially created because France and Germany tied their coal and steel sectors together to create trust and peace in the center of Europe. When both Germany and France agreed to this union, they openly invited other western european nations to join. The BeNeLux and Italy accepted and together these 6 created the proto-EU
The issue for the uk being close to the us is that Charles de Gaulle thought that the uk would side with the us and not europe if a US/EU dispute would happen
4:25 because the European Union is meant to not be largely influenced by nato to evitate a domination by one superpower
We Love EU🇪🇺🇨🇿. Now we have economic, political and military power when we are together, alone we are weak.
Greetings brother
I'm with you brav !
🇪🇺
So does Scotland but England dictates everything in the uk 🏴
Economic is there, I don't really see Czech political influence in European policies but ok. But where is EU's military power?
15:04 | Depends where they enter from. Those that enter from Italy by sea, are free to go wherever they want, except, some Schengen members closed their border because of the migrant.
Those that enter from Greece, have it way harder because although Greece borders Bulgaria, which is a member of the EU, Bulgaria and Romania are still not a member of the Schengen Area, meaning there is no free transit through Bulgaria and Romania even for other EU citizens, let alone foreigners.
Correction : EU didn't pay others to handle OUR problem with the migration crisis, it's the whole western world's problem, including the US, since they helped A LOT to create the crisis and many migrants stranded in EU and Turkey want to go to the US but the US, as far as I know, doesn't seem to understand that EU is paying to keep the migrants away from them as well.
The US first creates instability in the Middle East and North Africa then retreats within its own borders at a safe distance from all the bother arising from their political interference and then criticises the way the EU manages the situation the US left on its doorstep. This comment is not meant as a personal criticism of Minkes as he seems like an intelligent person who is looking to educate himself so Kudos to him.
So French here and I will try to answer your question about France not willing to let the UK enter the EU. For that we need a bit of history background and that goes back to the war. Charles DeGaulle was in the army when WW2 was declared and he refused the surrender of the french government in 1940. During the war he had a hard time fighting for France and against to kind of enemies. First were the Nazis and the second one was the Alliance of Churchill and Roosevelt. This last part is important because Roosevelt did not want DeGaulle as a leader for France while Churchill was too much in need of the US help to really care about what the US help meant for France. After a few "verbal battles" between all the leaders DeGaulle finally won but kept in mind how the link between the UK and the US almost made France a US administrate.
After the war a lot was to be rebuilt and while France started to be part of the newly formed NATO, DeGaulle left the organization unhappy with how the US administration was handling it rejoining NATO only under Sarkozy's presidency.
Now with this background in mind, DeGaulle also identified a lot of differences between UK farmers and French Farmers and because of the way the UK is tied to the US DeGaulle felt that the UK would be under the US influence most of the time trying to shape the EU to suit the US interests. And he felt that the newly created bound between France and Germany (which was always seen by the UK as unhealthy for them) would be jeopardize by the UK membership. And to be fair to him, the UK have always been a pain in the ass in the EU.
History proven the French were correct. You shouldn't have allowed the UK in.
Yep, if it weren't for the UK admission, the EU would now have stronger ties between members, a constitution and an army to protect EU's interests (and the lead in some tech industries).
On the other hand, there is a chance a more autonomous EU would have evolved more into a friend of Russia and that would be a questionable combination (imagine a cocktail of russian resources and european technology...)
And DeGaulle was right.
And France has always been a pain in the ass period
@@reno.zed1 no it did not. The UK wouldn't have left if it did not mean federalisation. Most members did NOT join on the idea of surrendering their sovereignty.
The EU is generally a good thing and almost everyone in europe likes being a part of it and the reason there was alot of debt is because of the 2008 recession the same thing happened in US and is the reason the US have an enormous national debt
That isn't true. 67% of Italians under the age of 30 are in favour of leaving the single currency and eurosceptic Matteo Salvini is clear favourite to win the next Italian general election. The populations of Hungary and Poland are majority Eurosceptic. Marine Le Pen, leader of the anti-EU party National Rally is level in the Polls with Macron to win the next French Presidential election. Not to mention one of the big three members just left the EU. To say almost everyone in Europe loves the EU is a totally false fantasy. Also, the EU is not Europe. Europe is a continent of 44 nations which includes the likes of Russia and Turkey along with others. The EU is a political entity with 27 members.
@@dean1039 All of your information is either several years out-of-date or straight-up wrong.
- Matteo Salvini destroyed his own government in 2019 by throwing his coalition partners under the bus in an attempt to call for a General Election, who then proceeded to form a new govt with the center-left. His party has been on a downward trend ever since - down to 25% from 37% one year ago.
- Hungary & Poland are not Eurosceptic in the same way Western European far-right parties are. They do not have any desire to leave the Union, they're just mad that the EU won't let them commit all sorts of human rights violations.
- Marine Le Pen is trailing Macron by double digits in every single poll, this is a complete lie. Her prospects look even bleaker now with Macron's favorability ratings skyrocketing following the Council's approval of the recovery fund. And that's not even taking into account the fact that every time Le Pen is in the spotlight for long enough people seem to lose interest in her, part of why the 2017 election went from a "head-to-head" race to her getting blown the fʊ̈ck out in a legendary fashion.
- Arguably Brexit has actually made the EU stronger than before, as it lost the Northern states their 'qualified majority' in the Council. It also removed the English veto from the conversation, which was previously often used to obstruct progress regarding European integration. This also arguably caused Germany to flip to a less fiscally consevative position, essentially ending the concept of a unified Northern bloc.
- The EU is _technically_ not Europe, the same way the US is _technically_ not America. Y'all gonna just have to learn to get over the fact that these two definitions are becoming increasingly synonymous with each-other. 🙃
Can't wait to leave the EU
@@markrichards636 And it's working soooo well for the UK, am I right?
@@mek101whatif7 Explain?
Something that people who argue against open borders in Europe often forget: Europe pretty much had open borders until the 19th century. The borders that came into place between 1850 and 1950 were largely artificial, cutting through cities, language regions, provinces, farmlands, etc. I lived on the Dutch-German border as a kid. Its removal in the 1990's basically returned the situation that had prevailed for hundreds of years prior, ending silliness such as farmers having to pass border controls to tend to their fields on the other side of the 19th century border and being taxed on crops or sew-goods they bring across. The situation without borders is infinitely better that the one with.
And no, people without EU citizenship cannot just move across borders as they like. A Syrian refugee in Germany cannot settle in the Netherlands or France, unless they gain German citizenship and by extension EU citizenship. Most EU countries have a strong system of civic registries ... something England never had.
You have freedom of movement and travel when you are a citizen of a member country of the Schengen agreement. As a refugee, you are bound to the country you first enter/get registered in, or as a migrant you are bound to that country until you are a full citizen. During the height of the refugee crisis, that led to a problem since the border countries of the Schengen area are stuck with a lot more people that they can't possibly all care for. So the other EU members agreed to take up a portion of the refugees. The EU leaders wanted to make it organized throughout the whole Union but there was a lot of opposition from countries like Hungary or Poland.
As a German I still don’t understand why you would think you can only have the benefits but don’t have to do anything for it.
open borders area amazing, it is just so nice that i can go from the netherlands to portugal with no problem, and for alot of people living on the border or in towns splited by borders like baarle nassau/ baarle hertog it makes life so much easier
The open borders are great we dont need a visa for anything we can go to any eu country to work or live it only applies with eu citizens so if your not from the eu you dont have the same acess to free movement
Josh misJudged Er, no open borders doesn't only apply to the EU, it also applies to any marauding illegal mass that fancies imposing itself on saps that believe we all have the same ethics, when we clearly do not!
That's not because you don't need passport anymore that you don't have to show your identity card. The free movement area is only available from european cityzen whos part of the EU
@TheRenaissanceman65 What do you mean by immigration? As a foreigner in Germany, the kind of resident permit that I have allows me to go anywhere in the Schengen area and enter it at any border crossing (though Lithuanian border control once asked me where I was going, which surprised me), as well as settle, be employed or open my business in any German federal state. But if I find work in Vienna, I'll need to convince Austrian authorities to grant me permission to work and live there.
The only people permitted to work and live anywhere in the EU are EU citizens (and maybe some others, like Swiss and Norwegians?) and foreigners that have a Blue Card.
For people from countries that are not in the visa waiver program, many kinds of tourist visas exist. Some are for a particular country, meaning that if they cross a country border, nobody will stop them, but if someone checks their documents later they will get in trouble.
@TheRenaissanceman65 Immigration is when foreigners enter a country. What I'm asking is what kind of immigration and which foreigners you're talking about. Iraqis coming to study at Cambridge? Irish coming to work in London? Refugees looking for a safe place?
@TheRenaissanceman65 it's not difficult once you state explicitly that you're against all foreigners who are not tourists. Now that you said it, I know that your motivation is xenophobia.
I never would have found nor watched your videos if it weren't for the suggestions. Nice vid man.
About the UK and France: you have to understand that prior to WWI (1914) and them becoming allies only shortly before, they had been the biggest colonial competitors in the 19th century, and for almost 700 years they had been at war with each other on and off (100 Years War, Napoleonic Wars, Wars of Louis XIV, Anglo-French war of 1214,...) so it's a major historic rivalry. Perhaps some sentiment of having to share being one of the most influential members with the UK was there..
Other than that it was both a personal matter for then-French president Charles De Gaulle - who hadn't grown too fond of his fellow War Allies the UK and the US - and a matter of keeping European institutions and affairs completely unhampered by outside influence. He saw the UK joining as "a Trojan horse for the United States" because of their rather close bond.
The US he especially saw as a threat concerning global affairs, on the one hand raising the fight against international communism by sending troops and pressuring governments everywhere, on the other hand tying and slapping the hands of its own allies regarding their overseas territories - which is basically still going on, communism having been replaced by mostly any old excuse to interfere.
Why the veto? Because the European member states consider themselves sovereign and independent.
The UK never considered themselves to be EU citizens besides their UK citizenship while they where a member state.
While being a member state they did not adopted the Euro currency and benefited from all sorts of opt-outs.
I'm from the UK and think the EU's main benefits are that it gives greater negotiating power on the world stage, it allows for large projects that individual countries wouldn't be able to do on their own, prevents internal conflicts arising from trade disagreements and in general makes it far easier for European businesses and people to work across and travel between different countries.
Brexit was generally driven by a desire for more national sovereignty, along with greater control over our borders. There's also this element of people disliking the UK's slow decline in power and believe that if we go it alone we can make better trade deals and become more economically competitive. The thing is we have to have a good relationship with the EU after Brexit because they're our main trading partner, a fair amount of the population still needs easy travel and employment within EU countries, and we also have a peace agreement along the Northern Irish boarder which relies on their being a virtually non existent Northern Irish boarder.
when you get a chance if you haven’t already check out the history of the entire world i guess by bill wurtz. it’s awesome
Would you like to have borders between US states?
The EU is the biggest trade market on Earth.
The USA consist of States that are united without internal borders between states.
The EU consists of States that are united without internal borders between states.
Isn't it strange that the average American has such an issue with comprehending that simple fact?
:)
The problem with the UK's closeness to the US was that while the US wanted Europe to be dependent on the US, most European countries wanted to ensure greater independence.
I would recommend reading, "Ninety Percent of Everything: The Invisible Industry That Puts Clothes on Your Back." The most respected basic text on logistics on why open borders, and lack of delays of any kind in shipping increase profits (which should increase G.D.P, wages, quality of life, which in turn leads to greater rights/education/etc.) and opportunities.
Open borders between EU countries aren’t that complicated, because Europeans generally don’t mind too much (with exeptions) if other EU citizens migrate into their countries. It’s sort of how state borders within the US are open.
Obviously there’s issues that arise with international crime and such, but there’s interpol for that.
Also, people moving from outside the Schengen area are subject to the usual immigration rules when moving inside it.
It's open borders for EU-citizen.
As a Estonian EU was mostly a "Get integrated to Europe" foremost and I support it. From worldview perspective and obviously geographical it made sense.
From a personal perspective it meant going around Europe would be easier. The currency is the same, no borders (just have a local ID card with me the size of a bankcard to travel around) so its really easy. Its also easier to compare wealth. Talking about wealth, the EU arguably has been a positive experience. Estonia has seen a rise in life quality and average wealth.
The negatives are also there, loss of sovereignty somewhat but again the counterargument is as a small nation we already dependend on others so its only natural to belong to an organization. Also some blanket policies as you yourself pointed out don't really work everywhere as you can't finetune it that well, one big example is our energy industry really relied on shaleoil but since going green we have had to phase out shale and go more green.
On the whole again the positives outweight the negatives and from a personal perspective I do see myself align with a lot of ideas and the general worldview that the EU is going for.
So far the EU is like a "soft federation" like your mum telling you to clean your room once or twice but not giving you a spanking if you fail to do it and tries to meet you half way.
Wow the EU government now wants an army, there have been comments about empire and the destruction sovereignty and accountability is extreme.
rwer qwrqwr You are stupid, and the EU army is needed
@@purdy9431 A common European army? Hello, based department?
u should do a live stream sometime like later this year or something, if your not to busy of course
I love that idea
As to answer why countries want to join - you get plenty of benefits. You can usw structural funds to improve your country and even though you have to pay contributions (something like "member fees") there are only few states who pay more than they give (like Germany), the rest absolutely takes more than they give. You also get better political standing, access to many beneficial treaties, more diplomatic power, even more military power. And of course, the common market boosts your economy on a large scale and European citizenship is also very good. To be honest, there are very few reasons to not want to join (or to want to leave), most of them are associated with certain loss of autonomy over some policies (like immigration or some market policies) and, sadly, nationalism. People just think "the EU prohibits us to call central-european-made yoghurt "Greek" or call a spread "butter" if it's not butter" instead of looking at all the money, opportunities and benefits the memberships grants. Surely, the EU is not without a falt, mainly the bureocracy is terrible, but the benefits outweigh the negatives.
Source: I am citizen of the EU.
The fact of France veto was that the European Economic Pact was made firstly to create a kind of economic freedom from USA. There was the necessity to get free from economic policies imposed by the Marshall Plan. This feeling fell down through time anyway. There were also a kind of fear about Cold War and Europe didn't want to get involved in another war, as American first ally. So, substantially, a will of getting out of a political and economic "bipolarism" USA-USSR...
They forget about the BeNeLux, which is appalling. It was the earliest union and both paved the way and provided the model for the ecsc, eec and eu. Furthermore, both the video and reaction were from a very American viewpoint. It is very clear that the video has not done its homework. Can’t really fault the reaction for doing the same, but he really should do some looking into the union, because he has a lot of misconceptions
When UK first requested to be a part of the EU it was under the presidency of Charles De Gaule who was treated like an unwanted guest by Churchill and Roosevelt.
These last ones wanted to take control above European devastated countries for rebuilding contracts, money etc. There was even special dollars french bank notes edited as new currency right after the war.
De Gaule was highly cautious about their real interest hidden behind their agenda and wanted a clean cut of the “english speaking Atlantic union” who didn’t benefit the European countries freedom to redeem themselves.
The Brexit is a sad and non-so-surprising example his fears wasn’t totally unfounded…
After being accepted in the EU, Great Britain wouldn’t be part of the common currency system, negotiated significative low rate exports taxes, but accepted eagerly the money of the PAC (community agriculture pact) to help their farmers.
In summary they wanted the advantages but not the inconveniences…
Living close to borders of 2 other countries was/is great as your job market included those countries as long as you knew the language... So if you were specialised in your field it opened 3 markets for you to explore... Ie You could work in Germany and live in czech Republic where its cheaper to live...
I’m a native of Denmark, and the thing about Greenland deciding to leave the EC (now EU) was, as far as I understand it, caused by the Greenlanders first and foremost being very unhappy with the common fishery policies imposed by the EC. Greenland wanted more control of its own waters when it came to fishing, and so they prefered to be outside of the EC and enter into a fishery agreement with the EC instead.
A second reason being that when the Danish Kingdom as a whole decided to join the EC in a 1972 referendum, Greenland actually had a majority of people voting ‘no’ but since Greenland didn’t yet have its own internal home rule at the time, they were forced to join the EC along with mainland Denmark, since the overall voting result was a ‘yes’ vote. When the natives of Greenland were granted home rule a few years later (in 1979), the Danish government allowed them to decide for themselves whether or not to remain in the EC along with the mainland. And so, Greenland decided in a 1982 referendum to leave the EC, effective from 1985.
The Faroe Islands on the other hand already had home rule when the previous all-Kingdom referendum was held in 1972 and so they never joined the EC due to their ‘no’ vote, unlike Greenland.
I’m Italian and I do like the European Union 🇮🇹🇪🇺
I definitely think it needs to be reformed but i am hopeful that one day we will unify completely and become a federation.
If Single European countries want to matter in the world they are gonna have to matter in Europe first.
Very true. Slovenia as a small country has seen a rise in quality of life since it joined.
MrKosman123 It absolutely did.
I think the Schengen area also helped a lot.
I go there pretty much every summer 🇸🇮❤️🇪🇺
I am italian too and i'm of your own view. 👍
Well the problem of spreading those values changes from country to country. For each country we try to examine the case and find out how to adopt to the specific country.
It's not easy, it's not fast, it requires a lot of time, but if we can find out a way to do it, it's worthy.
Yes Europe is a vast continent full of different countries, societies, cultures with different values, but we are starting to consider all ourselves ad "Europeans", not only Italians, French, Germans, Polish etc... Being "European" now have another meaning. We are developing this concept in order to make people proud to be part of this project and effort. Because yes, we are all part of a different culture, that's undeniable, but all these cultures evolves through time. Like we aren't romans, but italians, every other countries in EU have the same situation. Since we don't want anymore being enemies, we are trying to develop our cultures to a common line and goal. And that goal is "being Europeans". It doesn't mean refuse our heritage or culture, but make it suits more the values of the EU.
We now accept French, Germans, Polish, Rumenians, Bulgarians, Czechs, Slovakians, Hungarians, even Austrians as our brothers and sisters europeans.
In this sense, we are becoming a single nation. But this process will not take a moment, it is a process that will need years of slowly and progressive movement to that common goal. We just have to consider the opinions that comes outside our country and make our stuff work for others, other than us.
The biggest problems in Europe are:
- Some political parties in Eastern Europe are trying to creare authoritarian regimes (Hungary, Poland, also Slovenia recently) and use their VETO powers inside the EU to block any resolution or law that threatens their power.
- Migration crisis: there was a big lack of cooperation between the COUNTRIES of the EU. Sadly people say that it's the EU's fault for everything, when it is actually an issue that can be solved only among the countries, the EU has no real power in the matter. However politicians love saying "it's the EU's fault", it's obviously more popular than saying "it's our fault".
- National political parties and governments do not take responsibility for their own actions: every good thing that the EU does, the governments say "it's thank to us", but for every bad thing that happens the governments say "it's the EU's fault".
- Reforms are indeed needed because the EU is still incomplete, but the rise in nationalism and populism threatens to block any reforms in the near future. A big step towards a more unified Europe has been archieved during the coronavirus crisis: i'm talking about the European Recovery Plan and the Next Generation EU. Austerity measures were a mistake in the past, now it's time for investments. If the plan succeds, which we all hope it will, it would be amazing for everybody and it could stop the rise of nationalism and populism.
Schengen is the border agreement between nations in Europe, but you need to have a Visa from one of them to be able to travel through the area. You will still be checked at each border but should be allowed to move. The EU has created great wealth and stability to the continent, for a continent that had wars almost every 20-30 years in the last 800+ years, now we have had almost 85 years of peace.
Also, what is missing from this video is to discuss the European Economic Area(EEA), that is one of the pillars of the European Union that govern free moment of labor and goods. Through the EFTA agreement, Iceland, Norway and Liechtenstein are part of the EEA.
Each EU nation can close their border if they choose so, and this has happened in emergencies, like now in the COVID crises.
I'm Icelandic, I have lived in Denmark, France and live now in Germany for years, the EEA/EU has given me a lot of opportunities in life and I believe strongly in the EU mission.
I personally feel like there is quite a bit more to the story that the video doesn't show.
*Firstly, France and Germany* had a very rough rivalry leading up to the second world war. Having been always in such proximity, they developed quite differently from each other, in culture and language. After feeling intimidated by the Prussians and some conflict over the borders, they had the franco-prussian war in 1870 where Germany just marched into Versailles and proclaimed the German Empire there. Afterward, they had the first world war where France won and declared the Versailles treaty which put some burdens on Germany which they took very personally. By that point they had a real "hereditary enmity" and before you know it, it came to the second world war where Germany walked into France and just acted as the place belonged to them. In the span of like 80 years, they had 3 big wars with each other in which both countries took the piss out of each other and apart from that they had quite a rocky relationship over like 1700 years.
So after the second world war ended, Winston Churchill called for a United States of Europe in his speech in Zurich stating that "The first step in the re-creation of the European family must be a partnership between France and Germany." and that "There can be no revival of Europe without a spiritually great France and a spiritually great Germany." Churchill was kind of the first person to really ever talk about a completely united Europe, and he saw the potential that Germany and France could have if they decide to lead it together.
Germany and France did after the second world war decided to work together and to make it all more official they signed the Élysée treaty in 63' which created the so-called "franco-german friendship". Both countries have been crucial to the development of the EU, and they are the driving force behind it. Without this friendship and cooperation, the EU would have never been able to exist or survive.
*Secondly*, I guess this is quite a difficult point to understand for an American, but to kind of get a grasp of the EU you have to understand that all those countries have shared that small space for decades. There have been a bunch of wars and conflicts, half of those countries belonged at some point to each other, but all in all, there is kind of a sense of community and cultural respect that is just something every European grows up with. I guess it comes just from so many decades living by each other's side. The fact that you can travel without having any borders has just brought the people so much closer, while every country still maintains its cultural identity. There is sometimes border control where you have to identify yourself, but as long as you are part of an EU country there will never be any problem. It definitely helps in maintaining peace, and it isn't like anyone really opposes that type of immigration (with maybe the exception of the UK) especially because it is all legal. Also, trucks transporting goods travel faster and more efficiently, and there are a bunch of massive economic benefits coming from that.
*Thirdly*, some points that weren't mentioned that are kind of Important:
-this video just kinda omits the existence of the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia that was a big concurrence to the European Union.
-the EU has made some interventions and officially has an "army" that isn't allowed to do anything. There is still a lot of discussion over it.
-The EU is a very dividing topic and since Brexit there has been a bit of an anti-EU movement. All in all, there is still a majority that is very pro-EU as it does bring a lot of noticeable benefits.
The more complex something is, the more things are present to go wrong. Complex is literally multiple/many parts. Think of it like an A.K. v. a Bullpup. Simplicity always makes things less likely to go wrong, but complexity can bring about results that simplicity may not be able to.
I think the final goal of the UE is to create some kind of United States of Europe. It´s a very difficult task since it comprises many different countries with many different cultures but maybe one day it can happen.
The "problem" with the US wasnt the fact that they helped us, it was the fact that we were right in the middle between the USSR and the US, making the Europeans of back then very frightened of becoming the battleground between the two. That's why France wouldve vetod the UK.
Many of the founding fathers wanted the european union with the aim to make it a federation at the end. Many integration steps make much more sense if you look at them with this in mind
Love your reaction your reaction and analysis are good
The problem of EU external borders is that there is 1 customs service per states, so it's hard to coordinate actions to protect the union
The ironic thing (thinking about Brexit) is that the EU is as democratic as you can get, but the English (AND I am talking about the English because the Soctish voted to stay in the EU) still hate it and think it is autocratic.
As for the names (so many councils) it can be confusing, which is a problem, but it is again really democratic.
Basically, to keep it short, the "Comission" proposes new laws, but those have to be approved by both the "Council of Ministers" (which is basically the council of the secretaries of each state: meaning if there is an economic issues, the treasury secretary of each state get together) and the EU Parliament (which is voted in by popular, democratic, vote).
Only if the Council of Ministers and the Parliament agree something becomes "law"... but of course there are people that find themselves in gray situations, so they can addess the Court of Justice, whose mission is to oversee that the spirit of the "law" is achieved.
It's a very choppy explanation, but at least is short... The important thing are the Four Pillars or Freedoms: freedom of movement of people, capital, services and goods, meaning everyone go everywhere and trasnfer money without hassle, you can get services from companies from other states and companies can sell the goods they produce/sell everywhere in the EU. Again a choppy explanation...
Edit: I forgot to mention that the members of the Comission are proposed by the "European Council" (basically all the democratically elected leaders of each state) and has to be approved by the Parliament (again, democratically elected by the people), and there is a Comission member for each member state.
Can you react to the following sometime in the future please:
Zinedine Zidane when football becomes art
Ronaldo Phenomeno A living Legend
Ronaldinho moments impossible to forget
also you are free to live and work throughout the EU if you are an EU citizen, which migrants are not,
also the US paid mid american countries to take care of south american migrants. so why did the US do that if they were not going to see that money ever again?
Brit here - Brexit is extremely polarising indeed. Friendships strained, families fallen out. Not helped either that every area in Scotland voted to stay in the EU, so they naturally feel they are being dragged out against their will. (Incidentally Northern Ireland and Scotland voted to stay and England and Wales to leave). Could Brexit bring about the end of the UK?
do you guys in the US not get to cross state lines without having to go through border control?
cause I like going to Belgium or Germany without having to go through border control.
The difference in culture is huge though.
in a week or so you should hit 1k, do u have anything planned for that??
I'd love too! Any ideas? Id love to do a live stream soon like you mentioned. I'm open to suggestions/ideas
@@MenkeYT maybe combine 1k and a live stream and do a live stream celebrating 1k subs. idk just another idea.
I think that's a great idea. Depending on when we hit 1k. I'm out of state until Monday and already have videos scheduled through then. If we hit 1k before I get back(which would be nucking futs) I might have a live stream just past 1k...
I also need to figure out which platform to stream on, twitch or CZcams. I'm thinking CZcams to start but I'd like to do a weekly live stream on twitch or something.
@@MenkeYT yeah
The ECSC wasn't created to pool resources and recover. While that probably was a side effect it was mostly created with the goal to avoid war over these important resources between the two most powerful continental powers, France and Germany. The EU is mostly a political project of a continent that was torn apart by war twice in 30 years. It's also where the rift between the UK and the continent comes in. The UK mostly considers the EU to be an economic project and they don't fully appreciate it's political aspects because they haven't suffered through the world wars like the continent did.
On migration it is estimated that over 9 million people fleeing the war in Ukraine will enter europe, I live in Ireland and we have taken over 8,000 refugees from Ukraine. I have no problem with this and I am gladly accepting 3 Ukrainians into my home this week. Being able to live and work in any european country without any borders is great also on culture very country maintains their own culture and is encouraged to share it with other European countries.
Is there a way I can PM you my thoughts as from the UK with an understanding of Brexit?
I feel like a lot of countries think they don't benefit cause they don't see it in money (caise most money is going to poorer countries) but isn't that kind of the idea of an insurance? It only works if people who don't have that much risk also participate and you never know when you'll need it. Besides that there are just problems that policy wise could never be solved by a single country. And I think what we should also note is that since the formation of the EU it's member stated have known barely any war on their own soil which is also quite a prestation if you look at European history.
But the money is often the reason why people join or stay. Being in a big block like the EU makes small or poor countries stronger plus it's kinda not favourable if you stand on your own against all other European countries. But richer coutries feel like they don't need it.
15:57 cute cat bro
I think there will always be little inconsistencies. Then you just talk to each other and find a compromise. You had the no-sayers in France after the war when relations with Germany became closer again. As a German, that is completely understandable for me.
But now comes the big but. This union is not for us who were born before the union.
It is for those who were born when the European Union was already in existence. These people learn from each other from the ground up to have fewer prejudices against other countries and Europe will move even closer together.
Change is always difficult but often necessary.
I am what they call a federalist. I see myself as a patriot of what is still a potential country: the Federal United States of Europe. The concept of a Federal EU is in my opinion a testament to the USA. On some of its aspects a federal EU would mimic the Federal USA that we know. This is why I am not chocked by the freedom of mouvement within the EU as long as we have proper frontier protections. For me an Italian guy or a German are fellow citizens of the same country: my country the EU, like a Floridian and a Californian are both Americans. Obviously I represent one side of the opinion, and there is also a strong euroseptic movement in Europe.
Charles de Gaulle explained why he opposed UK’s candidacy. He said and he was right that UK was a different country, turned towards the seas and not towards the continent. He rightly predicted problems between UK and EU. Being an ally to the USA wasn’t in his opinion an issue, the problem was that UK was beyond being an ally. They were and still are extremely submissive towards the USA to the point it is embarrassing to watch. On the other hand, a strong, properly integrated and indépendant EU would be an excellent ally to the USA and not a threat.
The question on open borders does not have to be a chaos.
Bear in mind that we are talking about opening borders with relatively similar socioeconomic status, democratic legal systems and personal safety.
Differences in those areas are the major drivers for large scale immigration, so when you reduce differences there, migration is hardly a problem.
15:02 No, that applies only to EU citizen
I didn't want to leave the EU 🇪🇺.
I wanted to remain.
The debate split my family in many ways, but it is what it is.
Kru Andrew's: May I ask why you wanted to remain, I will say from the start that i wanted Out but I am curious?
@@Loki1815 The freedom to live, work and retire in any EU country. I'm from Wales so we get a huge amount of EU funding for arts and heritage. Being part of a huge trading block about 500 million strong. But also its the ideology too. A united Europe. European human rights, ideologies, justice, trade. An historic coming together after centuries of division.
I think leaving is gonna cost us a fortune and allow the "off shore" class to dodge EU laws on offshore taxation, not to mention open vulnerable institutions up for "free trade", the NHS being one. Enough damage was done under New Labour. Under Boris and Brexit, I do fear for the future.
Edit:
Also, not to mention the safety standards especially in food. Who knows what crap will be peddled for food if we don't remain within EU standards for the sake of American trade.
@Kru Andrew also simply: peace. Europe has never had 70+ years of peace before, and Britain has never gone 70 years without fighting one or more of its European neighbours. Now, for the first time in history, we have. There are many reasons of course, but the EU is a very, very big one.
@@kruandrew8930 EU funding 😂😂😂😂
That money is ours in the first place they just give some of it back sometimes
@@chrisklitou7573 Right and as long as the governments refuse funding to parts of the country for political reasons we will need the EU to distribute that wealth. The EU gives the UK far more than the UK gives to the EU. In trade alone the UK will lose out.
Hopefully canzuk can become a thing soon
Basically the UK left cause of illegal migration, large budget (basically if u live there part of the taxes u pay are not destined to improve the country but to improve other members) and they wanted more freedom to choose their trade partners and their policies so they're not dependent on European legislation
A lot of those values are quite universal values, so it's not really an issue.
As for freedom of movement, it has caused some issues, mainly with the eastern EU members which tend to be poorer than the western ones but overall, a lot of Europeans like having the freedom to be able to live and work anywhere in the EU.
Another thing, the EU project is a political and economic project, almost like a hybrid country where around half the laws are made at an EU level for its members and where the EU speaks as one for its members, especially on many economic matters but the countries inside the EU still have their sovereignty, in many ways, the EU and its members are a bit like the US and it's states but different, many laws being done at the top end whiles others at a national level, or state level in the US.
In any case, it's complicated lol, but I do think we will see more integration in time, especially when it comes to politics and with everything that's going on with Putin and Ukraine, there's a fair chance over the next decade that we could see more integration and cooperation on military, security and energy policies in the EU.
In the case of the UK and I say this as a Brit, the UK being rejected twice was mostly because the UK is too close to the US that is seen to put US interest above European and in many cases, above its own interest and that is still the case today, Brexit was likely a sign of that which is quite ironic because the UK share a lot more in common with EU countries than it does with the US if you look past the language, especially on social policies, health care, workers rights, taxes, sports we play, cars we drive and countless other things.
With that said, I do think the UK will rejoin the EU at some point but it won't be any time soon and it might be a broken up UK because there's a real chance of Scotland and Northern Ireland leaving the UK and wanting to rejoin the EU, nationalist in Scotland have dominated for decades and it's looking like they are taking over in Northern Ireland which is really bad news for the UK government and Brexit.
I also think with everything that's going on in Ukraine, it puts things into perspective in what matters, things like Brexit look quite petty now and Brexit is looking like a massive mistake for the UK which many Brits are having second thoughts on it, unfortunately, even if the UK wanted to rejoin, I doubt we could for at least 2 decades as I can think of a number of EU members that will block the UK from joining.
The video you're reacting to is a good descriptive history of events, but leaves out of the motivational context.
The main motivating factors behind the development of the EU were economic, historic and geopolitical.
In the 19th and early 20th century, intra-European rivalries resulted in imperial conflicts that eventually caused WW1 and led to WW2. The first goal was to ensure peace within Western Europe by decreasing competition between countries and increasing cooperation. This happened against the emergence of new superpowers in the form of the USA and the USSR. The smaller European countries had more economic power, the more they acted together.
This eventually led to the European Customs Union. This eliminated costly tariffs between countries - which increased trade and the profitability of CU members. It also allowed the EU to negotiate with other countries and customs unions as a block. Due to its size, this made the EU more powerful in its negotiations.
The single-market was also designed to increase trade between countries - in both goods and services. This meant that non-tariff barriers (e.g. phytosanitary and other regulatory checks) were removed because countries had very similar floors with regard to standards. If reduced costs for companies who wanted to trade across the continent. One production line could be used for all EU member markets - rather than having to produce different versions of products to meet regulatory requirements of different countries.
Other reasons that people wanted to join the EU included to benefit from EU grants etc. Some countries are net-contributors* to the EU (i.e. the government pays in more to the EU, than the EU pays out to these countries). Other, less well economically developed countries get more out that they pay in. This provides an incentive to join as the EU will provide grants and funding to build infrastructure that accelerates economic development. Meanwhile, the net-contributors may pay more in to be members of the EU at the government level, but membership of the CU and SM massively benefits their companies. In this way, these net-contributors financially benefit from membership as the governments take a cut of company profits via taxation etc.
Things like Schengen and free movement are sometimes misunderstood. There are no/limited checks at borders within the Schengen area. This is because people are checked when they enter their first EU country. Data is shared between countries so, for example, if a known terrorist were to attempt to enter Germany, they would refused entry and could not pass throughout the area. Germany is operating a very similar standard to Poland or France, so, for the most part, Poland and France are happy enough with Germany's policing of this. Keep in mind, people typically have the right to enter most countries anyway (e.g. an American can visit Ireland for up to 3 months). The advantage of Schengen is that is allows for easy cross border movement for workers and goods. One can live in France and work in Belgium or Spain. The journey time transporting goods are reduced as checks are not really necessary.
Free movement of people applies to the right of people to move for work. You cannot typically move to another EU country and just live there unless you have the means to support yourself but can be deported if you cannot.
T
Free movement allows people to provide things like financial and legal services across borders or for employees of multi-national companies to go work in another EU country for a few months without difficulty (e.g. an Irish Microsoft employee can go work in the Netherlands to work on a project for 6 months or a year without having to fill out reams of paperwork).
It also helps deal with industry shortages. If there are, for example, not enough jobs for electricians in Poland but a shortage of electricians in France, Polish electricians will move to France. This can benefit France by reducing inflation (cause by skills shortages and increased costs of building infrastructure such as housing) while reducing unemployment benefit payouts in Poland. Typically migrant workers contribute more to the country that they moved to than the average native born worker so there is a net taxation benefit. The workers will also often send money to their home countries and in some cases this can be a substantial percentage of that countries GDP for less economically developed countries.
Basically, everybody likes the financial benefits of membership. The common standards of the SM increase trade and wealth and ensure that countries do not compete with each other in a race to the bottom with regard to product standards or workers' rights. The CU magnifies EU members power in trade negotiations and makes intra-EU far less expensive.
The part that people don't necessarily always like are the institutions and processes i.e. they don't like when an EU court rules that their country's regulations do not meet the standards their country agreed to in an EU treaty. Or they don't like regulations that pass through the Council and EU parliament even though these regulations have been enacted to meet the goals their countries negotiated to fulfil as part of the EU Treaties.
Jingoistic publications in member states often present these things as violations of sovereignty etc. when in fact, their governments agreed to these obligations, their parliaments passed the treaties, the representatives in the EU parliament voted for them and/or referendums/referenda were passed in their country. Bad journalism often presents the idea that you can have things like the customs union and the single market without the EU rules, regulations and related laws. What they miss, is that the EU, its CU and SM are its rules. They cannot function effectively without them. This is where much of the tension comes from.
In sum, the EU is a rules/process based multi-lateral, multi-level international membership organisation. Membership comes with obligations but with massive financial and geo-political benefits. Members agree what areas of decision-making will be centralised and which will remain at the national level. Members can leave when they want. You can join if you want (with some restrictions) provided you meet certain minimum human rights and economic standards. It can take some credit for the relative peace in Europe we've seen over the past 60 years and has massively contributed to the economic success of most of its members. By acting as a bloc, the EU has managed to multiply the influence of members in a variety of areas including global warming, trade, human rights etc. It is imperfect, but its processes allow for adaptation over time.
Hope that helps the "why" of the EU!
UK: we are going to leave, your dictatorial
EU: no we are not, can you not stay?
UK; NO
EU; Okay.
UK: but we want acces to the EU market and free travel.
EU; No.
UK;........
EU; bye and good luck.
Would be like Texas being free leaving the USA as an independent country.
Erm NO incorrect. Theresa May made abundantly clear the UK was pulling out of the single market
And when exactly did the UK demand free travel in the EU?
@@Red-hh7dm UK is lame and pretty usually says shit
@@Red-hh7dm they demanded full access to the single market without border controls or tariffs whilst simoultaniously not wanting to follow any EU regulations...
It's rediculous and they became the laughing stock of europe.
Imagine Texas would leave the US or Scottland would leave the Uk, but they still demand to be able to move and trade freely... they would get laughed at aswell.
@@meganoob12 lying little pricc.
The UK has rejected a EU offer that would make it easier for people aged between 18 and 30 to study and work abroad in the wake of Brexit. The European Commission had said the deal would be a limited arrangement, not a restoration of free movement.19 Apr 2024
Dude. I appreciate your willingness to educate yourself on this topic. Each and every country is culturally different, yet have collective aims. The EU is not a threat to that cultural identity. Think of all the ethnically diverse groups in the US. They are America yet also have their own cultural identity. The only way to understand this is to travel throughout Europe. I believe your concerns are due to how America perceives themselves and their neighbours. A North American trading block considting of Cansda, America and Mexico would be very strong economically . The main issue in America is social and economic inequality.
no refugees are not allowed to switch their country and have to stay in the first they arrive, this is one of the biggest problems as u can see it basicly means italy spain and greece gets all the refugees and the rest says "no thanks" so there needs to be a plan to place them fairly in all countries but right now especially the eastern states poland and hungary opposing such plans
The European motto is in diversity there is unity and you have to think of Europe like a big family we have a long history together we have common history like Roman Empire Times ottoman occupation times Christianity we have the same values, freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of press etc Europe together is much more strong that the states by themselves imagine all American states where independent would be not that nice
Sure we have issues but the EU is a blessing. Just look at the misery the UK is in right now having left. And even though the cultures of Europe are diverse, they are not *that* diverse. And it's not like the US has a single culture either so the problems are mostly the same. The difference is that we (mostly) like to solve things diplomatically by working together and not by antagonizing people. And we have a true democracy over here where everybody is represented instead of a two party system that can only lead to black and white solutions.
Also I like to mention that we did not just "pay other people to solve our [immigration] problems for us". Sure you can look at it that way but another way to look at it is that we like to help problem countries around us to get a grip on their situation - and that usually requires money. The money we get back from it is the money saved by having to deal with illegal immigration. Hey, we could also waste that money on a crappy wall like they did in the US - I'm sure that is working out great.
The problem with a lot of people from the US is that they think checkers when they should be thinking chess instead and that is the reason why they don't get the way we do things over here.
With the UK leaving, they have to negotiate with the EU, if they want to sell wares here, how movement of population should happen between the areas and so on and so forth, just like all countries negotiate between each other how these things should happen. It's a completely normal thing. The thing that some Brits apparently didn't realise when they voted to leave was that now they're negotiating deals from a much worse place; the Union will fare as it always has with or without them; we don't need anything they produce. They need a fare few things produced in the Union. But now that they're not within the Union, they will have no say in the demands made on products sold in the Union. Of which there are quite a bit, ftr, mostly for the sake of safety, uniformity or to give farmers here an edge when selling.
Of course, it does mean they have control over their own borders (in a way, considering Northern Ireland and that whole... situation) and thus can exclude people as they like, which is what I understand was the thing the people voting for Brexit was really concerned with. And it gives you more of a sense of autonomity and national identity? I think it's still up in the air whether it's better for them considering negotiating trade deals with other countries. It might. It might not. Until they've actually negoatiated enough deals that a trend emerges, it's all just speculation. Not like Corona made everything any easier in any way.
Flat out incorrect. We are doing much, much, much better outside of the EU and are projected to completely outpace and surpass the economy of France in less than 15 years.
@@Red-hh7dm Keep repeating the same thing over and over in the hope it might become true doesn't work.
for fuck sake, even the Financial Times makes it clear that the UK has really not done itself any favours and it's all due to Brexit.
czcams.com/video/Bo1DrClNXes/video.html
Free boarders are ONE OF THE BEST THINGS that happened to us. Especially for us younger folks when it comes to work and education. For travelling it is a big plus as well. You dont need a passport inside the EU at all. An ID is all you need...and those are controlled more or less at airports and countries who still aint in the Schengen area.
I have to say that the EU brought us as people also more together and we are a stronger than ever. Yeah here and there we would like to punch each other and than make up etc etc... but the more countries join the more open minded we get and enjoy even our differences be it cultural, opinions, whatever it may be, but also enjoy our similarities.
If you ask me it has more benefits than negative aspects but of course our system is far from being perfect but I am happy people thought of the EU to bring freedom to this wonderful continent. I dont want to imagine what it would look like here if people didnt come up with such plan.
@TheNewblackdog what exactly made it sooo bad?
how to start a war in the comments between british is to mention brexit lol
france and the US where not that close buddies at the time, De Gaulle thougt that the Us would have to much influense on EEC thru UK
The US also got open borders between its states, its more or less the same thing
uk got more in return than they give back, now there econmy goes down, also they also got a huge lack of workers.couse before brexit a lot of workers came from the EU, now the UK dont
Nothern Ireland are now a part of EU and UK, brexit was a disaster for UK
The regret General De Gaulle was against American imperialism still in force today unfortunately the American army does not represent justice for the rest of the world but a conquering imperialist army I am surprised that you are not aware of this my friend ^^
Yeah, there are a series of threaties that impose lineguides to all European countries to follow.
Despite we italians had the chance to build up our own nuclear power, we decided to renounce it. We decided to use nuclear fission power only for civilian purpose, but this branch of nuclear technology was later shut down after Chernobyl incident.
After that incident, many other european countries decided to shut down nuclear plants and use other kind of energy sources, like fossil fuels for example.
Still today we are too much dependent to fossil fuels to fuel our societies. But, at the same time, we are developing a program for nuclear fusion reactor. This also with the collaboration with USA and Russia. Yes, despite the divisions between USA and Russia, both countries have joined us in try to find out the technology for our common future.
Still, founding this program wasn't a priority goal until now. So much of financial budget for energy was focused majorly on fossil fuels.
We hope that this will change in the face of our common problem of Climate Changing. We all need this technology. Free and clear energy for all means a better world for EU, Russia, USA and whoever wants to join us.
The thing with the UK is that the mayority of people living in big cities voted to stay in the EU but everyone else voted for the Brexit so a lot of people were actually upset by this. As an italian I went to London a couple of years ago and I saw a guy with a sign that said "Brexit is gonna ruin my life". It's because of economics, you basically lose a lot of tourists from all over Europe by exiting the EU because now you have to get a passport instead of just showing your identity card (not sure if this is the name you guys use forgive me). Me and my family for example sadly never went back after that time. Brexit always was something that would have positive consecuences in the long run (I think everyone was aware of that) and the pandemic only aggraveted things making even more difficul extimating how much they are gonna lose before they get back up
Every country has its own culture, but that does not mean it's goals are the same. The western values that the eu, the us and other developed commonwealth countries hold all point in the same direction. The right wing, left wing conflict is the same in all of these places. Sure there are cultural differences such as language, food, customs and times, yet the goals of economic and social development are the same throught. I am personaly conservative and despite mainstream media marketing us like eurosceptic, many of us enjoy its benefits and believe we need it to compete in a world dominated by superpowers to hold a share for ourselves. Many liberals do so too. The uk leaving it was an error on their part, but a nessesary one as no member states will folow their path if its a bad example. 🇪🇸🇪🇺
It's a good thing that the EU only describes very rough what they mean with stuff like fight against discrimination, saving heritage and so on. The EU only describes what values they roughly mean/what guidelines you should follow. The best way to reach those goals is different in every country, thats why every country itself should decide the exact steps, depending on the culture/history of the nation.
They failed to mention that Greece had issues long before, which were known as they had to sign several bills regarding it, and Greece and the E.U. agreed to: 1) Control Spending by and at a certain amount, 2) Not take any loans beyond a certain amount/rate, 3) Agree to consequences if this is not followed. What happened over the next few years was Greek government, not the people, keep spending and borrowing foolishly, but also that they borrowed money and made deals with France and German,y and U.S. banks, among others, that directly broke the agreement. So, France, at the very least, is partially to blame.
In the 60's, Europe, aside from maybe parts of Germany were well and long rebuilt. The second veto still represents a conflict of interest, with looking at all the things Britain kept doing proved the fear valid, but France, and to be honest Germany, were also worried about losing their power in the proto-E.U. Even today, think about Greece, the majority of power is in the hands of France and Germany, and sometimes they actively exploit the other nations (or functionally ignore their representatives).
The start of the video is all wrong.
The Benelux Union is a politico-economic union and formal international intergovernmental cooperation of three neighboring states in western Europe: Belgium, the Netherlands, and Luxembourg. The name is a portmanteau formed from joining the first few letters of each country's name-Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg-and was first used to name the customs agreement that initiated the union (signed in 1944). It is now used more generally to refer to the geographic, economic, and cultural grouping of the three countries.
The Benelux Union was the first. Not the treaty of Germany and France. It's probably no coincidence the EU Treaty is signed in the Netherlands and the EU headquarters is in Belgium.
Schengen is the best part of the EU. The Euro has not worked out so well except for Germany and the Netherlands who benefited at the expense of the others, most notably Italy whose economy stagnated ever since.
Of course we have some disputes and problems, but personally im really proud of being a European citizen and i'd be really sad if all the great stuff we made it work together just would disappear from one day to another.
France said no to UK because of Charles De Gaulle, and said yes after De Gaulle death.
And with him died idea of strong and independent EU to rival powers like US and USSR
From an Australian point of view, once the EU adopted a single currency and free movement between borders, it’s effectively “The United States of Europe”... extremely similar to the USA.
Not quite. We do not have a "federal" level of government. Each member state is sovereign. The EU is a confederation.
if there was a united states of europe, it would be the worlds largest economic powerhouse by quite a lot. There are many reasons why it hasn't been pushed towards unifaction but the main 3 currently are
1. UK
the UK only wanted the trade, not the federal unifaction, so they veto'd everything regarding that slowing down the process drastically. But this wont be an issue shortly
2.Greece
Greece is extremely corrupt and is a leech on the EU, forging the requirements to enter and Veto's everything in the EU due to bribes and terrible administration.
3. Stupid polices
The EU at its foundation is extremely slow to reform, and stupid policies (Germany forced syrian refugees that no country wanted) heavily detered the idea of unifaction
Not quite but that’s the end goal.
A Federal Europe is what we’re trying to achieve.
Europeans need to understand that small sovereign nations don’t mattar anymore, especially if compared to giants like China and USA
No.
@@petesthename1588 we are already the biggest economy in the world of we count even the not core countries of the union if we count only the core countries then we are the second
In the USA, about a third of people have left their home state by the age of 30. Free movement of people is absolutely necessary to have "Free trade". The EU project necessitates making people rootless. It is a project created by the "Anywhere" minority in Europe to turn the "Somewhere" majority into "Anywheres" like them, whether they want it or not.
Support for this project is incredibly strong in politics, media, academia and trans-national corporations. Among the actual people it varies by country, by age, by immersion in pro-EU institutions and most strongly by whether you feel you belong somewhere or not.
When referenda are put to people over any aspect of the EU, the people tend to be fairly split on average, but this means they often do not go the way the EU officials want. SOP here is to have another. and so on until the "Correct" result is returned. In the case of Norway, you see politicians desperate to sit at the "Big table" while the Norwegians are not really so into the idea.
This kind of empire just about works in the USA because the original states were very young when they formed up and for the most part the other states grew out of them. It was a fairly natural thing and when part wanted to break away, the rest beat them down with force.
It cannot work in Europe where states grew out of ancient nations who have variously been enemies and allies over many hundreds of years (thousands if you go back to the tribes that formed the nations). It is artificial and top-down, made by weaselly people who did not have the common decency to conquer with fire and steel, but by lies and pieces of paper. "It's just to manage steel and coal.... it was always to create a common market.... it was always to have free movement... it was always to have its own currency... its own monetary policy... its own flag and anthem.... its own army.... it was always meant to be a federal project." The gaslighting at every step is horrendous. They wanted a Federal Europe from the very start and brought it about step by step, each time saying they always were going to go this far, but it is a conspiracy theory to suggest they want to go further.
Whether they had the best intentions or not, whether it did any good or not, it is based on lies and contempt and is doomed for that reason alone.
France and Britain have been bitter enemies for centuries so no surprise that France didn't trust Britain. Also Britain has, due to history and a shared language, a special relationship with the US. The US, through the Marshall Plan, lent money so Europe could rebuild after WWII. However, Europe didn't/doesn't want to end up being controlled by the US. Perhaps France thought that the UK would use their special relationship as leverage to have more control than it ought if it were allowed to join the union. Although the common currency (the euro) came into existence in 1999, it had been a goal of the EEC since the 1960s. The common currency meant that Europe, as a united block of nations, would be able to compete against the US. The U.S. dollar is a benchmark currency and the Euro, especially now that it has its status as a leading global currency, is able to rival the dollar. The US would prefer to have Europe in its debt and under its control rather than as a competitor. There was some concern that Britain, through its ties to the US, would upset the applecart. It was thought that either Britain would use the extra muscle power for its own selfish advantage (rather than cooperate as an equal with its European partners) or the US would enter the back door in some way through its ties with Britain.