Bringing Britain Back into Europe: Macron's Europe 2.0 Plan - TLDR News
Vložit
- čas přidán 18. 05. 2022
- Sign up for Brilliant (and the first 200 people get 20% off an annual premium subscription): brilliant.org/tldreu
Macron has big plans for the future of Europe, with a new European Political Community being proposed to bring Britain and other non-EU members closer to the union. So in this video we'll explain the plan and why it's likely doomed to fail...
💬 Twitter: / tldrnewseu
📸 Instagram: / tldrnewseu
🎞 TikTok: / tldrnews
🗣 Discord: tldrnews.co.uk/discord/
💡 Got a Topic Suggestion? - forms.gle/mahEFmsW1yGTNEYXA
Support TLDR on Patreon: / tldrnews
Donate by PayPal: tldrnews.co.uk/funding
TLDR Store: www.tldrnews.co.uk/store
TLDR TeeSpring Store: teespring.com/stores/tldr-spring
Learn About Our Funding: tldrnews.co.uk/funding
TLDR is all about getting you up to date with the news of today, without bias and without filter. We aim to give you the information you need, quickly and simply so that you can make your own decision.
TLDR is a completely independent & privately owned media company that's not afraid to tackle the issues we think are most important. The channel is run by just a small group of young people, with us hoping to pass on our enthusiasm for politics to other young people. We are primarily fan sourced with most of our funding coming from donations and ad revenue. No shady corporations, no one telling us what to say. We can't wait to grow further and help more people get informed. Help support us by subscribing, following, and backing us on Patreon. Thanks! (edited)
A bit of infographical mistake: Hungary is NOT in the Eurozone, Slovakia is.
YES! the guys made a mistake there
I think one figure is incorrect, since it shows Hungary as a country who uses the Euro. Instead, Slovakia should be coloured dark green and Hungary left white (around 4:53 mark)
You are right
Wish it was correct :'(
Lol
They also got the Brexit year wrong. They put 2017 down, instead of 2021. Article 50 may have been invoked in 2017, but we didn't leave formally until 2021.
@@Locutus they got Greenland leaving EU wrong too. That's a misconception. It's an EU Overseas Territory to this very day. They simply voted to unincorprate.
I would know better too, I studied EU Territorial relations for HOURS AND HOURS. No other human should even do that lmao. I found it so damn fascinating though. Couldn't stop.
PS: Funny, it started while checking to see if someone was right, they weren't lol. It very much is a misconception. People swore they were right until I showed them the proof. It's really all in the link. You have to keep reading to jnderstand though otherwise confirmation bias sets in. That made some look silly in the thread discussing "GREXIT". (My term I coined.)
I still joke about "GREXIT" though. It's the closest thing to BREXIT but it's incomparably comparable lol. There's no other thing to compare BREXIT to is all.
Slovakia is in the Eurozone while Hungary isn't. Just a heads up :)
Just came here to say the same ;)
Bruh I asked why you'd say that, are you happy but no. Now I see it myself, haha 😂
And it still has not been changed in this video.... Would be nice, TLDR NEWS!
But slovakia is in the no history zone tho
I am interested in the internal politics of sweden and Finland.
A video about how they came to aprove NATO membership would be very interesting
Russia invaded. Its pretty much as simple as that. Both us (Finland) and Sweden have been neutral out of our own will, and do not upset Russia, but again because it was our choice. When Russia invaded and then started making threats they took the choice out of our hands and it made it seem like it was theirs to make. And the Nordics (or most people really) don't' take well to that.
Long time opposition to NATO was also because many of us didn't want to be involved in Afganistan and the many other dumb "American wars". But situations change.
No politics to talk about. Collective hysteria is a better word for it
@@BoltonForTheNorth collective hysteria?
@@BoltonForTheNorth No hysteria here in Finland
@@maxdavis7722 Its a troll or a stupid 13 year old that haven't learned to think for him/herself yet.
We need to be clear on what the European project is. Adding yet another layer of bureaucracy sounds counter productive. But if it's about having 2 levels of integration, one smaller federal Europe, and an extended commercial zone and military alliance, that sounds good.
I think if EU members like France and Germany want to be integrated into a federation, they should probably just do that as a project independent of the EU. I think it doesn't make sense having some members pushing the EU towards closer integration and others pushing for it to be less integrated. You could always have some federation of Western Europe as an EU member.
@@RealUlrichLeland but its not only that some want more integration compared to the current one, some also want less. so a 2 lane EU could be healthy for all.
This is removing a layer, by allowing a voting system as apposed to animosity voting.
@@RealUlrichLeland "I think if EU members like France and Germany want to be integrated into a federation, they should probably just do that as a project independent of the EU"
That's literally impossible by EU law.
"I think it doesn't make sense having some members pushing the EU towards closer integration and others pushing for it to be less integrated."
It indeed does not, but having members resist integration at all is already against the core principle of the EU and should not be a thing. Ever closer union is literally what every memberstate explicitly signed up for.
"You could always have some federation of Western Europe as an EU member"
And have their votes matter even less? I think not. also see first point.
Another layer of bureaucracy sounds like the EU we know.
These bite size explainers are journalistically a very good concept - and you execute them well in terms of presentation. But they are marred by repeated factual errors of sometimes great importance. Yesterday you claimed Article 16 in the NIP opens up to unilaterally "suspending" or "scrapping" the protocol itself. That is completely wrong. Today you say Greenland left the EU, which is a quarter-truth if not completely wrong. They were never a member as a national entity (only as a part of Denmark).
Everyone knows that Greenland was a part of Denmark, it’s not that hard to figure out what he meant
@@deaththekid3998 most do, that isn't everyone
Keep pointing it out every time. They do this basically every single video, and it seriously undermines their reliability. I want to like TLDR, but while they make huge factual errors so regularly, I just can't.
And Faraoe Islands too I think?
@@TheClownesque quantity over quality is how most journalists work nowadays. Its unfortunate, but our short attentions spans means that the people with attention to detail are not valued. It's good that the comments at least provide more detail.
4:50 There is a mistake here. Slovakia uses Euro, but is not included. And Hungary, which doesn`t use the Euro IS included? I think you switched them up.
They make a lot of mistakes. Recently they removed Hungary and add Romania to Visegrad group
@@kupieckorzenny5093 Because that’s how we comment and they get the algorithm going. TLDR wants to grow bigger and that’s why they make all these mistakes…not cool, but the system sucks 🙃🙃🙃
Funny these two in particular got mixed up - I hear they are historically very fond of each other...
/s
@@TheLukass71 Now? We like eachother. Historically, we beat the shit out of eachother.
Did Greenland actually leave the EU? If it was 40 years ago doesn't that mean they left the ECC and not the EU?
Following a referendum held in 1982 it withdrew from the EU, and is now associated with it under
the overseas association decision. Greenland is eligible for funding from the EU’s general budget through the EU-
Greenland Partnership. This allows strong relations between the partners to continue and responds to global challenges,
making it possible to develop a proactive agenda and pursue mutual interests. The partnership defines, in particular, the
framework for policy dialogue on issues of common interest, such as:
* global issues concerning, inter alia, energy, climate change and the environment; maritime transport; research,
innovation and education;
* Arctic issues.
But lets not forget that the entire population of greenland is only 56.000 people
You’re technically correct, which is the best kind of correct.
Greenland is part of the Americas and once they become fully independent from Denmark they won't join the EU which is a European organization.
@@adineatha9766 If you think they want to leave denmark for Murica, then you are soooo wrong, comming from someone born there
@@sancte3982 Talk about twisting my statement. I said they're geographically in the Americas (North America).
4:54 I believe who ever made this map has confused Hungary for Slovakia. Slovakia is in the eurozone, Hungary is not. While your map shows the opposite.
"Nations like norway could be brought into the fold for the first time"
European Economic Area: am I a joke to you
Great video, but I don't think that's a good read on the first part of this proposal. My take is that it isn't about the UK; it's about Ukraine.
Many eastern European countries are both eager to join the EU and under the influence of other powers such as Russia or China. As such, if the EU wants them in, it needs to act fast; and it wants them in both for ideological/humanitarian reasons (we want as many countries as possible to benefit from the EU and to be independent from Russia/China) and more pragmatic reasons (we want to limit Russian and Chinese influence at our borders).
The problem is that, as France argued many times, many of those states are not quite ready. The poverty, corruption, and in Ukraine's case damage these states face would enter the EU with them and weaken it economically. Even worse, it could threathen it politically, as corruption reduces trust in politics and has a tendency to cause populism: if we want the EU to go forward, we really don't need a second Orban. Up until now, the norm was to wait for candidate states to rid themselves of these problems, but that would require time that we do not have if we all want to limit foreign influence on Eastern Europe.
That's where the European Community comes. It isn't just a way to integrate friendly states that do not want to enter the EU; it is, more importantly according to me, a way for EU candidates to prepare themselves. It would allow Ukraine, among others, to benefit from much needed direct European economical support, in order to rebuild the country after the war, and ideally to build it back even _better_ . It could also give access to an European jurisdiction on some aspects, something that could help those countries fight back against corruption. And in the meantime, it would make these countries enter the European sphere of influence, and therefore making them more impervious towards foreign influence.
Thanks for that. A good insight that I didn't think about
It would be amazing if this European community could also govern trade relations between its members and the EU. It would solve Switzerlands, Norways and the UKs issue with ECJ jurisdiction over trade deals by making it a bilateral political body.
I would be interested to hear TLDR's view on this - I agree with you btw.
Don't Norway & Switzerland have 'special partnership' status/agreements already ?
Whatever the situation some solution to the conundrum needs to be found (like a tiered system, with the countries that adhere to the most 'principles' have the most influence for example).
He's repurposing old ideas with current policies that are already in force. The EU is already helping Moldova and Ukraine fight corruption, introducing legislation towards entering the EU, and investing in structural projects. I 100% agree with everything you said. I am just saying that beside the modification of treaties it's mostly an attempt at generalizing and formalizing already existing policies.
Great and valid points.
Actually, Eastern European and Western Balkan countries already have Association Agreements with the EU, working towards membership.
In the case of Ukraine, the AA was ready for signing already in 2014, where then President Yanukovich’s sudden refusal to sign sparked the Maidan revolution. The AA was later signed and has been in full force since 2017.
The AA contains a roadmap for tackling corruption, how to change legislation to conform with EU legislation, monetary support (€17Billion till now), and also a DCFTA (Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Agreement), overseen by the European Court of Justice, giving Ukraine access to the EU Single Market.
So, in principle, most not-yet-EU-countries are already in the EU orbit through these Association Agreements.
4:45 Hungary isn't in the Eurozone
And Slovakia is. TLDR guys need to be more careful, there is a small mistake like this one in almost every video.
I think there is a kernel of sense in this. Some EU-members want more integration, others are satisfied with free movement of people, goods services and capital. Sounds good to have different tiers of integration.
It's puzzling some people find this to be impossible or whatever. It's common sense really.
That would penalise some countries whose population doesn't want freedom of movement or some other "fundamental principles" that aren't really fundamental but as they are part of the powerful countries' agenda they want to push EU-wide they are considered fundamental even if democratically and/or absolutely they aren't. Unless they can ultimately prove it's fundamental and the penalty is fair, which is awfully difficult, I doubt it will ever go ahead.
@@shonenjumpmagneto We're afraid that too much cherry-picking may lead to a failure of the European project.
In fact, it's very hard to find examples of successful organizations where widespread cherry-picking is allowed. You're either in the club or you aren't. But you can't skip the fees and still use the gym, so to speak.
@@EuroUser1 The EU defied precendence at least once already, it can do it again I would argue.
@@shonenjumpmagneto I share your enthusiasm about the capacities of the EU. But defying precedence is not the same as ditching everything that has worked throughout History.
I do support ad-hoc arrangements to bring aspiring countries closer to the EU, while their request is processed. But I do not support an already-privileged member cherry-picking rules of the Single Market in order to become even more privileged - or in order to appease the racists!
Greenland didn't leave the EU, they got home rule in the 80's and became a weird situation like Jersey, Guernsey and Mann is for the UK
They did leave the EU in a sense, because before home rule it was considered part of the EU, but after gaining home rule they decided to leave.
But the video is wrong because it described them as a member state. They were never a member state, they were just part of one. The EU didn't lose any members when Greenland left.
The Greenlanders had a referendum to leave or remain in the EU. Greenland had home rule before this referendum, they didn’t have to leave the EU to acheive it.
Greenland is part of the Americas. Not sure if they want to or can be part of European Union when they're not in Europe.
@@adineatha9766 Greenland is also part of Denmark.
@@zyanego3170 I mean Greenland wants independence. And they're geographically part of North America.
Once they're independent they will not join EU.
Unanimity really isn't sustainable, but I can understand why some countries will shy away from moving to QMV alone. Maybe a compromise is needed: Qualified Majority Vote for the majority of issues, and a Superqualified Majority for more significant issues, with the requirement of 65% of member states and 80% of the population, or something of that liking.
nah, Start with framework of basic laws. take the money control out of the hands of Eurozone. my suggestion bitcoin! then each state(country) handles it own affairs' and negotiates and compete for residence in side of Euro zone. The best system will get more money. and because they can make it, they will before to improve or go broke.
@@davidmichaels299 lol no
Another thing that might be needed in such a case, is the possibility to opt out.
If all EU countries want to start using the euro, except one single country, then that country should be able to opt out of the euro, and not be forced to adopt it.
Likewise, if all EU countries want to sanction Russian oil and gas, except one country that has been bribed by Russia, then that country should be able to opt out of the sanctions, while all the other countries join the sanctions.
But I agree, unanimity works when you have only a handful of countries. But when you're getting close to 30 countries, it just isn't sustainable. There is an expression called "Polish parliament" that describes it well. Look it up on Wikipedia, if you are unfamiliar with it.
@@davidmichaels299 I have yet to hear a less informed suggestion on the future of the EU. This just sounds like a way to break apart the EU in an Instant. Why have the countries compete economically like this when the one thing agreed upon by all EU states are the economic benefits of the Eurozone and Schengen. And why Bitcoin??? It would be a logistical nightmare, an environmental disaster and make entire countries dependent on some extremely volatile speculative asset that they have no control over. Cryptobros really need to try harder to shoehorn the almighty blockchain of their oh so revolutionary pseudo currency into every niche of our lives...
America never would have become the prosperous and rich juggernaut it is today under the unanimity principle of the articles of confederation.
Tier 1 could be: Shared military, shared business taxation, Euro, free trade, free movement of people, a common budget.
Tier 2 could be: Euro, free tade and free movement of people, similar to today, representation and voting rights on affected matters.
Tier 3 could be: Free trade, right for input on affected matters.
Free Trade is not possible without a much deeper integration on labor rights and much more... your proposal looks a bit like what the british voters were told to vote for brexit uk beeing t3 i believe
The eurozone needs a common budget. Taking monetary policy out of the hand of nations whilst not taking their taxation and budgetary obligations means that countries such as Greece cannot respond to crises. With a common budget Greece would never have gotten into so much debt and could have been assigned aid during the crisis. If a region of France or Germany went bust that is what would have happened, As a British Rejoiner the one issue I have is the Euro. Clearly that issue is outweighed by everything else but it is an issue that needs to be fixed before we have another Greek debt crisis.
Free trade can only work with a lot of political and economic integration, basically harmonizing a lot of laws, rules and regulations like we see with the single market and custom union.
Without the harmonizing of rules, no country in their right mind would have full on free trade with no restrictions when a country can change the rules to have an advantage at the expense of another, that's where the EU single market and custom union solves that problem by harmonizing the rules at an EU level for all members.
The EU does not do free trade; free trade does not stop at any border. Few countries in the world have tax policies that are anything other than both immoral and ruinous.
Tier 1 : "classic" EU Membership only
Tier 2 : Eu Membership + Euro + Schengen + no rebate + same corporate taxes + Common army + every tier 2 member vote the same for every decision to make in the EU council, this common vote is decided between tier 2 member at qualified majority + more EU funding than in tier 1 (in practice, tier 2 member will slowly abandonned the funding of tier 1 member).
If this is implemented, I think France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Benelux countries will be the first tier 2 members, but soon enough when tier 1 EU funding will decrease even the most eurosceptic EU member will do whattever it takes to be tier 2. Do it Macron, we can't be blocked forever by the CEE.
I think he gets most of it right, the fact that outsiders can exploit the system by influencing one member of the union makes it very weak, but getting the member states to comply if the lost of sovereignity will be very hard even though it might be necessary for the future...
The whole eu is corrupt anyway, it makes no difference.
Like when Obama when and told cameron that america had billions of dollars in tech trade waiting for them if the exit the EU? Then goes and like a robot says “stay in eu publicly” all while talkimg shit non stop about the EU in private…. America was worried EU was becoming too close to our trade power so picked one nation of idiots controlled ny jewish press and blamed the immigration america paid for and caused on the eu. Now every youtube chanel in america has an annoying british accecnt, and we see military cooperation.
Then what is the sense of fighting Russian imperialism only for Europe to became the subject of the most powerful EU states? This fact that Germany and France will simply toss Europe according to their will because they spent and invest the most into the EU, they have it planned. That's why for example Merkel gave powerful speech about the need to form EU Army, and tbh she really sounded like she was copying one of the famous austrian painters.
@@bowwak5366 EU army is useless if Germany and France are too scared to confront Russia. Only Anglo countries plus Poland and Ukraine have the balls to take on Russia.
@@millevenon5853 Indeed but still they want this army to enforce treaties rather than using it in real combat. You can call it a military police that could be used anywhere where population might be angry at federal government. Similar to what often is National Guard of the USA doing, their purpose is to defend America but they are the first ones to being deployed anywhere when riots or protests gets hot.
I live in Norway.
I've been against joining the EU my whole life.
But I like this idea of tighter cooperation and integration, as long as we have the option of maintaining a confederate relationship.
So, sure.
I can see myself voting for this.
The eu was brought about and had its plans to become the start of a one world government. All done in secret, nothing they will ever say again will be trusted by many people. The eu spat its dummy out when Britain left the club it paid huge sums into and got nothing back but beurocracy which other eu states never seemed to follow. The eu should be abolished, and if something is to replace it then they need to be transparent about its goals instead of just mugging off the people while taking over covertly.
Can I know tho, out of genuine curiosity, why you've always felt against joining EU?
@@haidouk872 look what EU was and what it ve become. The only thing that will change - more bureaucracy and more speech regulations as we see this now. Just USSR 2.0 and it can be even more bloody. EU in such form is dead, look what will happen to ECB by the end of the year
Genuine question, why is Norway so against EU membership? It has been far more against it that the UK ever has been which is surprising to me. I assume Norwegians have better reasons the the Brexiteers given ~ 70% of Norway are anti EU as opposed to ~ 40% in the UK
@@redakteur3613 I mean, if you honestly see the EU as an USSR 2.0, it's very hard for me to take any of your arguments seriously.
I've always thought a multi-speed EU was a good idea. 3 lanes with different levels of integration and responsibility, and nations can move between them as they wish.
The EU should have been the high performance economies with shared values, who are 100% on the same page be able to race on the fast lane, and have a free trade agreement with the other countries.
The current EU is too bloated and slow , the high performing economies have hindered themselves in a rush to bring other countries to the same level, which is an impossible task.
Slower preforming and corrupt countries are happy to take EU money, they waste it on corruption, then complain about EU rules.
@@asterion3291 then leave ;)
@@asterion3291 “… and now EU have issue because Poland have taken 2 million actual war refugees from Ukraina”
Stop spreading lies, EU does not have issues Ukraine refugees coming via Poland and other Ukraine neighboring countries. (And you’re whitewashing about Poland behavior in refugees crisis in 2015 as they were also war refugees from Syria, Libya, Afghanistan, etcetera).
Getting back to Ukraine refugees.
There are mechanisms within EU to share refugees burden, Poland should activate Dublin protocols and redistribute the load.
This is particularly important as some say this war will prolong for some years and Ukrainians refugees can be way more than 10 million.
One should also be aware, some of the Ukraine refugees entering through Poland and Ukraine neighboring countries, move to various countries in EU and stay with their families, friends, and also state provided social care or refugee centers.
@@asterion3291
Ok, I'm no expert on the judicial systems of either Poland or Germany, but from what I was able to understand from a few Google searches into the matter, the issue isn't so much the politicians choosing the judges, it's not only Poland and Germany in the EU where elected politicians appoint justices, but the issue is politicians in Poland being able to fire judges.
Poland's system allows politicians to remove justices from their supreme court, Germany's does not.
That is the very key difference that has the EU at odds with Poland, their system allows the government in power to sack justices they don't agree with or would stop their plans, and the only justification they'd need is that the justice was somehow acting politically, which is easily enough fabricated.
And that system, having the power to fire judges that would disagree with what you're trying to push, is dangerous to democracy, more so than where judges are just picked by the political parties, even though I find that system to be potentially dangerous too, just look at the US right now.
@@scratchy996 The corruption goes both ways. Western politicians from otherwise less corrupt states are very happy to engage in corruption in the East ie in places where they can't be voted out. Manfred Weber and the EPP have brought up some of the most corrupt EU heads of state such as our Borissov, Hungary's Orban and even non EU Serbia's Vucic etc... Weber is still going to Borissov's deranged rallies and parroting utterly disgusting propaganda and thus faithfully serving the Bulgarian mafia.
So yes, corrupt governments steal the money but corrupt politicians from supposedly non corrupt governments are happy to hand it out in exchange for specific Western firms getting very favorable market access/contracts
Maps on this channel are consistently having mistakes. Almost every time there is a map, it is somehow wrong. This time it was Slovakia left out of the Eurozone and Hungary being in the Eurozone.
and switzerland isn't in teh eu
@@sajeucettefoistunevaspasme Switzerland isn't apart of the EU, just the European single market
Slovakia is in the eurozone, there's an error on the map
"Look, I mean, there's probably hundreds of countries in the world and it's very hard to keep track of these things; very confusing."
- The Onion (U.S. Shocked Andorra Not In Africa)
@@martir.7653 I remember that one
I love that Macron shares some ideas to move forward. We need to keep evolving the EU and make it more streamlined and democratic.
Did the UK agree to this? 🤣🤦🏼♂️
@@braddo7270 where is the added NHS funding again?
@@braddo7270 uk is irrelevant… the sooner u British people realise that the better for u….
@@braddo7270 I'm French, and I agree with you. It's racism and bitterness from the French and germans but you literally created the EU. It's upto you what you do. And people should respect that. Especially the French.
@@kennethkho7165 it will be added when we remove the tories from power and we can use their hoard in the treasury instead of them using it for bonuses and lavish houses 👍✌️
We absolutely need to thank Hungary and Poland for obstructing European decision making. Plus of course the UK for actually leaving the EU and demonstrating why EU countries need to be democratic ( none of the three aforementioned countries is) they make clear the EU needs to recalibrated. And decision making more streamlined.
The only thing I find really surprising is the idea that the UK would be welcomed back into the Union. There are absolutely no circumstances that would make such a result desirable. What Macron wants is interesting but considering France almost had a fascist president there needs to be a mechanism to stop members from pushing through or blocking certain decisions.
macron is a piece of shit hunting around for control for is overlords, If he wanted to help start with framework of basic laws. take the money control out of the hands of Eurozone. my suggestion bitcoin! then each state (country) handles it own affairs' and negotiates and compete for residence and there taxes in side of Euro zone. The best system will get more bitcoin. and because they can make it, they will before to improve or go broke. Bitcoin is native to the internet, and would scale. country who adopt early like El Salvador did will see massive economic gains as crypto assume it place as the world reserve currency. If Macron cared about France and not his international banking interests he would suggest something like this. But he suggesting more disgusting control of Europeans. Europeans would not be in a war if not for Marcon and Merkel
4:40: Eurozone: c'mon guys, you've clearly mistaken Slovakia for Hungary.
I wish we were in the Eurozone lmao
@@zsomborbaka3556 I hope you are joking...
@@zsomborbaka3556 So do I. :-) But I also wish that people learn their political geography... ;-)
@@nyali2 Not even the slightest, seeing at our "strong" currency and the rate of inflation, the price of everyday goods is already higher than with Euro as our official currency. It would also be easier not to exchange money every time we travel abroad if the target country is in the Eurozone.
@@zsomborbaka3556 The countries with their own currency have the tool to protect their economy. EUR is a failed project, as peripheral countries are suffering. Look at Greece or Spain. Inflating Forint makes Hungarian products far more desirable on the export market and in the same time makes import products way more expensive in Hungary. eventually encouraging customers to buy Hungarian products...
The inflation you see is far more to do with a Global phenomena than FX fluctuation. Hungary is extremely lucky not to have the EUR, you would be poor there...
Stop using “Europe” and “EU” interchangeably. They are completely different. One is a geographic location, as well as a culture, broadly speaking. The other is a political & economic organization. The EU can grow, shrink, or disappear altogether. Europe cannot. Norway, Switzerland, and Ukraine are obviously part of Europe but are not in the political organization called the EU. Stop conflating the two.
those terms can be interchangeable the same way the US and america are
@@just_pleb8977 that is the most factually incorrect comment I’ve seen on the internet in weeks.
Many people call European Union as Europe,like U.S.A. America
EU and Europe is like USA and America. They are the same thing even if you are technicly correct.
Don't be trigger by that because you will see Europe for the EU often and you will never stop being mad if you don't work on this little issue you have.
Is Europe and the EU the same thing?
Europe: A continent located West of Asia and North of Africa, with 44 to 51 countries.
European Union (or EU): A political and economic union of 27 countries in Europe.
The main issue with the EU is that it doesn't have sufficient democratic oversight for the power it holds.
true
Personally, I think the biggest problem with the EU democracy is actually the media. And no, not in the sense that the media is biased one way or another. But more specifically, that they are generally not informing the public of what goes on in the EU. As in, what new laws and legislation is being proposed and which groups are in favor or against.
When people vote for the EU parlaiment. They generally just vote for the party, which they vote for in national elections. Without the slightest idea as to what said party has been supporting or working against over the past 4 years. Meaning that ultimately, the politicians working in the EU are not being held responsible for the work they do, and whose vote they sit on, based on an uninformed population.
I would be ready to bet a thousand euro, that the overwhelming majority of the random people you meet on the street, is not aware of which group the political party they last voted for belongs to, or how many presidents there are in the EU (the institution, not presidents of member states). In other words, they would not be able to answer the most basic of questions, regarding how the EU functions.
@@sfp2290 Currently the parliament of the EU has no real power. It cannot remove EU presidents, reverse commission decisions or, propose or repeal laws. It is powerless entity with only the ability to agree to proposals made by the unelected commission and make minor amendments. It exists in effect to allow the EU to pretend to be a democratic institution without having to deal with what voters actually want.
The media and voters will care about MEPs is when they can actually do things.
@@bdcopp This is news to me. But then again, I don't actually know much about the process myself.
I will have to look into this, that is for sure.
I think you all are right.
I'd say that we should vote EU political parties formed before the elections, with an EU policy. Both because integration and because the games of groups formation after the elections are disgusting.
Anyway a more integrated EU with a real government and a common foreign policy won't never be allowed by US. I think that the expansion toward east has been pushed by the US also to prevent a semi-federal Western Europe, that would have been to strong to be controlled.
Excellent content, good delivery. At times too fast.
Thanks again,
Without sounding bad, the UK didn't leave Europe, it left the EU there is a difference, because we wanted to leave a trading block does not make the UK not in Europe..get it right TLDR!!
UK just flying off into space, leaving the European continent.
@@RoosSkywalker the UK doesn't actually exist, it left Earth years ago and became the United Galactic Empire
Now I say this as an American, but I don't see the UK coming back.
It's always seemed like the UK and America have a lot of the same base impulses (which would make sense from a historical perspective) and those impulses are different than continental Europe.
Recent example: The Nord Stream 2 Pipeline. The UK was against it for the same reasons we were; giving a historical adversary control over your energy supply is a critical national/economic security risk. Continental Europe did not care about that.
A lot of the difference revolves around views of security and long term preservation of the State.
that is not true at all. Continental europe is just compoased of many smaller countries which have no choice but being dependant on energy imports. Look France , its the key example. built up the largest nuclear fleet to be soveriegn on energy needs as much as possible. Same goes for the dutch and their own gas. Not every body has the chance to have huuuge oil /gas fields
@@tayloryoung9803 No Western European country needs to be dependent on energy imports from Russia. There were other sourcing options AND there was the option of nuclear.
It was a deliberate cost saving choice mixed with a reluctance towards nuclear
@@camadams9149 No , what western reliance on russian gas ? it depends a lot , you have no idea what you speak about : Belgium 6% France 17% Spain less 10% Portugal 9% Denmark 8% Irelande 0% ( all western) - Yes the UK around 5%.
And if we speak about Nuclear the picture is Hugely diverse too , many use more nuclear than the UK. the only difference for the UK is that they have domestic gas production.
so NO there is no chosen dependance . each country has weighted its options and yes some happened to be the wrong ones. Are you going to blame estonia to rely on russian gas ?
@@tayloryoung9803 "Are you going to blame estonia to rely on russian gas ?" Yes so Estonia more so Germany. Estonia is small potatoes.
"NO there is no chosen dependance " Yes, the dependence is chosen, sorry if that is inconvenient. Countries were not willing to take the economic hit and find alternative expensive energy sources.
It's a long running theme in continental Europe. The complete lack of military spending is another perfect example.
You included Hungary in the Eurozone and not Slovakia. It is supposed to be the other way :D
Well, the Eurozone map has an error. I'd be happy if we'd use Euro (Hungary) but unfortunately, we don't, Slovakia on the other does use the Euro.
Be glad you don't have the euro. After the introduction of the euro, everything has become much more expensive.
I think its just an acknowledgement of the current situation and a call for something to assist in a better way of responding to similar. More like a call for a brainstorming session. I think all of Europe has known for a few months now that this is going to require adjustment of some form.
nah, macron is a piece of shit hunting around for control for is overlords, If he wanted to help start with framework of basic laws. take the money control out of the hands of Eurozone. my suggestion bitcoin! then each state (country) handles it own affairs' and negotiates and compete for residence and there taxes in side of Euro zone. The best system will get more bitcoin. and because they can make it, they will before to improve or go broke. Bitcoin is native to the internet, and would scale. country who adopt early like El Salvador did will see massive economic gains as crypto assume it place as the world reserve currency. If Macron cared about France and not his international banking interests he would suggest something like this. But he suggesting more disgusting control of Europeans. Europeans would not be in a war if not for Marcon and Merkel
This speech was given the same day the first council of young Europeans proposed their own ideas on the future of Europe, after brainstorming for at least a year. This is also why all the European heads of state were gathered in Brussels, to listen to the concerns of our youngest (and future) politicians and commemorate the founding of the Union. Maybe we should listen to them instead of wasting our attention to Macron?
@@DarkAngelEU Or it may require someone like Macron to draw attention to what was there proposed. Not everyone who SHOULD be listened to, is.
Norway is already really intregated into Europe. Their a member of the European Economic Area, basicly EU + Norway, Iceland and Switzerland.
Norway is a part of the Schengen Area and adopts many EU laws (GDPR being a recent example).
The simplified reason Norway isnt a part of the EU is due to fishing, oil and a popular vote(52.2% against). This is what we are told in school here atleast.
And good on ya! Full EU membership is a mistake!
and thats why Norway was one the smart countries and didnt join eu
Would a multi-tier Europe just be a satellite state system? I suppose it would depend upon which of the countries went for greater integration…
4:51 Hungary still uses the forint
5:07 usually against their own volition; they are *kept* out
Great idea, would strongly support it! The treaties already allow a great deal of flexibility, but this proposal addresses pressing needs.
In the United States, we have the Higher Senate, where every state gets equal representation, no matter how big or small. And we have the Lower House of Representatives, where representation is based upon population. In our Constitution, states rights are strongly protected. That's how California and Texas, New York and Utah, can get along in the same Nation, despite being very different.
I know Europeans will die before learning from the Americans, but you have to protect small Euro Nation's rights if you want the EU to work. They don't exist only as satellites for France and Germany.
No one should follow merica. It's a joke.
Electoral college sucks
When 100 000 voters, let’s say Montana have the same weight as 2 000 0000 from California, that’s not democracy.
Agreed, we could learn from USA on how to respect member states' independence, but sadly in Europe, alot of Europeans see USA as one country with many "provinces", so the idea gets translated poorly and thus European policy effectively tries to dissolve existing nations instead of respecting them as individual members.
I don't know if it's the same in USA, but historically, the borders of European countries haven't always been the same. Which means alot of countries have parts that once used to belong to another country, and that influences the local flavor, so our cultures kinda flow into one another instead of ending at the border abruptly. This adds to the "provinces" idea that we are all one continent that simply flows into one another, even though there are obviously countries that have a stronger national identity than others. These countries are often seen as being contradictory, because they don't agree to this myth that all Europeans are alike or just a variation on the flavor. I know that in USA, Texans are really proud of their state, and I was wondering if it's even possible to find an American that won't call himself an American, but a Texan for example? To me it seems extremely rare.
I don't believe Europe has anything to learn from the US.
I do agree that unanimous agreements are difficult, however, I would loosen it slightly saying that as long as all countries agree, but minus one, then the EU can move faster and force more compromise in the EU. Having minus one, prevents deadlock.
@2:12 'institute montigane' nice pronunciation there 👏 👏 👍
It doesn't really seem that hierarchical to me.
Hierarchical implies some countries will have a higher position that others cannot obtain (or at least not without some of those higher countries losing their positions).
It seems, however, more like a tiered system, where each country can choose the tier that is right for them.
They all can choose the most integrated tier if they so desire, but they may also choose a different tier if that fits them better.
The alternatives are that the countries that want to move the slowest hold everyone else back;
or the countries that want to move the fastest force everyone to move ahead before they're ready;
or maybe some speed in between, where the fastest still get held back somewhat, and the slowest still get pushed to things they're not ready for.
Getting rid of the veto/unanimity is very important, not only does it hold thigs back way too much, it is also sometimes abused by countries who veto not because they dislike the thing they're vetoing, but rather to make demands in other areas and hokd the EU hostage if they don't get their way.
The EU countries that want to decide more by QMV could together sign a treat essentially creating a new EU tier that uses QMV and perhaps can decide things more democratically in other areas as well, and when the remaining countries are ready to join that new tier as well, they can join it at their own speed.
Smaller EU members are concerned about the implications of who will be in this inner tier.
Currently, France and Germany are balanced by 26 other countries who all have a say in any decision making. [*]
This means that less influential members with shared interests can either band together to support each other (for example the Visegrad group) or appeal to more influential members to represent them.
However, a more closely integrated, "federation", consisting of 6-12(?) countries would be even more dominated by France and Germany, which is why smaller members are concerned that their interests will be subservient to those of the largest, resulting in an implicit hierarchy of decision making.
[*] Indeed, things were even more balanced when the UK was a member as they formed a third party, in addition to (and often opposed to) France and Germany, whom other members could also appeal to.
Except the EU is already a hierarchy, because France and Germany can decide the agenda and that leaves many smaller countries to be unheard or even flat out ignored. Adding another circle and removing unanimity voting basically means solidifying the power of France and Germany over the continent. Macron wants to build an empire for France and we shouldn't bow to him.
It's a good idea for countries like France, Germany and Italy but for eastern Europe it's just a horrible as this will just grow the "second citizen" attitude towards countries like Romania, Bulgaria and the Baltics. A lot of ppl who work in the tourist sector complain about westerners calling them "second citizens" and this is not address anywhere. This proposal will just make it worse as the countries electoral power rapidly drops and a lot of voices will be silenced. Western countries don't seem to be bothered with eastern countries problems, ex: events around the war in Ukraine. And this may led to more division in the EU, wast and east, since the relations between the 2.
It should be counterbalanced by forming blocks of these countries. Such as a Yugoslavian block in the Balkan. Eastern European block with Poland, romania and possibly even Ukraine. Nordic block with Scandinavia, Finland and Baltics. These blocks of countries would and should have the same pulling power as a country like France or Germany.
That is very true.
It all comes down to how fair it feels to everyone.
No one wants to be a second vote citizen
No one wants their voice silenced by a minority (population in Eastern Europe is lower than in the western parts if you only count the EU members)
Finally, the more people you have in a room the harder it becomes to agree on something.
@@abbemartensson3850 This is a bad idea, the EU is fragmented enough and creating more fragments isn't solving the problem but deepens it. We need more close relations between east and west. I believe that German and Romanian or French and Bulgarian relations should be as close/good as German and French so that we combat the "second citizen" attitude from some western tourist. And this should be worked at.
Edit: U r just showing the "second citizen" attitude without even realizing it, ur last sentence is saying that: polish+romanian+ukrainian citizen equal (just one nation) germans. The EU is for equality and this is not equality, polish are as valuable as are the ukrainian citizens, as are the romanians and as are the germans. And every citizen should have as much voting power as the other and hence the working now model that some countries want to change, no matter his ethnicity (german, french, romanian etc.). The EU shouldn't make fast decisions, it should make right decisions.
There hasn't been a more direct and open proposal to make eastern and central European citizens second or even third rate citizens, until now. This proposal is straight up insulting
Western EU countries doesn't care of eastern EU countries problems that much because it's the eastern EU countries like Hungary who make everything hard. Although idea of Easterners being "second citizens" is completely ridiculous
By the time Britain comes back to the EU, it won’t be the UK anymore
Although the breakup of the uk is inevitable it’s going to take a helluva a long time I’m talking decades at least
England could be vetoed for half a century or longer. Most likely longer 😁.
Greetings from Bavaria
Edit correction: decade should read century
@@ellied.violet7372 you know, it's that self righteous attitude which pushed most English and Welsh towards Brexit friend.
@@doodlebug4360 Who cares anymore? Certainly not us EUropeans 🇪🇺.
The UK behaved like the entitled spoilt brats they are for 45 years of membership.
One was fed up with them.
They upped their game and behaved like entitled, clueless, cheating, law breaking idiots since 2016.
One is and will remain even more fed up with them now that they thankfully removed themselves.
Their best contribution of their entire membership.
Greetings from Bavaria
The UK under Boris doesn't deserve a space in Europe
i agree. we shouldnt accept them back til they actually elect a left-winged leader for once. britain is too alt right and will mess with eu votes.
Great video!
I want a Federal Europe
It took a huge effort for us to leave the EU, I dont support joining a slippery slope back to it.
If the EU/Merkel had agreed to the minor changes PM Cameron wanted we would have stayed. I dont believe they thought we were serious about leaving.
Lol. I’m sorry to tell you but nobody misses you.
you mean the minor thing of going after British tax havens for the .1%?
0:44 YES PLEASE.
How about NO
Europe is stronger together and for my grandparents the world in we live today seemed impossible. I would not think a federal europe would be such a bad thing.
Perfectly reasonable and realistic position. They should just be more honest that is the direction/ already arrived in many aspects.
nah, macron is a piece of shit hunting around for control for is overlords, If he wanted to help start with framework of basic laws. take the money control out of the hands of Eurozone. my suggestion bitcoin! then each state (country) handles it own affairs' and negotiates and compete for residence and there taxes in side of Euro zone. The best system will get more bitcoin. and because they can make it, they will before to improve or go broke. Bitcoin is native to the internet, and would scale. country who adopt early like El Salvador did will see massive economic gains as crypto assume it place as the world reserve currency. If Macron cared about France and not his international banking interests he would suggest something like this. But he suggesting more disgusting control of Europeans. Europeans would not be in a war if not for Marcon and Merkel
Let me give you a reason then. Denmark is a small country in the EU, yet we have multiple global corporations (Carlsberg, LEGO, Danfoss, Novo Nordisk, Vestas and MAERSK, just to name a few). Yet a recent directive on minimum wage is about to destroy all the wealth that the Danish working class has spent the past 100 years on ensuring through hard political work and at a constant risk of losing both their home and their jobs in their fights for better wages, paid vacation, paid pension, paid sickness leave and paid maternity leave, just to name some of them. These benefits, together with numerous others, have also cost lives to gain, but all of it will evaporate when this new directive takes effect, since it's all being handled by our worker unions who sign a special contract with the companies and agree on the hourly wage, together with all the benefits, as there currently are no laws in Denmark that dictate a minimum wage.
However, when this new directive takes effect, our parliament will be forced to elect a general minimum wage and align it with the poorest nations in the EU, effectively dropping the hourly wage below the living costs in Denmark, as the prices for food and for housing won't drop down, but instead continue to rise. Since the worker unions primary argument is wage talks, the companies can just dismiss them and refer to the law and there's absolutely nothing that can be done about it. So now the working class Danes are forced into a future where they will have to work constantly with little to no vacation, no sickness leave, no maternity leave, low wages, no benefits for long or extra hours, no real job security or safety and get such a shallow income that they'd be considered upper middle class to even afford a small apartment on less than 30 square meters.
We did try to fight it, but because Germany and France have more political power in the EU, we weren't listened to and we wouldn't be given an exemption from the directive. We literally got steamrolled by the larger countries in the union, with zero regards for the average Danish citizen. That isn't freedom. That's oppression and I look forward to the eventual election out of this fkn mess. Never have I wanted to leave as much as I do now.
Whatever we do, we need to ban interpretive dance in the Parliament. The closing ceremony was an utter embarrassment.
But it preaches tolerance! D:
USE, now.
There was a mistake with the euro zone map, Hungary is currently using its own currency the hungarian forint and not euro!
UK does not want EU or any other membership. Which is fine. UK needs free trade deal with EU. That would benefit us in EU and also UK. Current deal is bs for both sides. Also good deal would bring both sides closer on other issues
EU for us is more, we still follow Winston Churchills proposal. The thing is we do not accept others anymore, we will throw everyone else out.
Let’s be clear, if the EU if any of this is going to work, the commission needs to become democratically elected.
7:15 QMV is a really good system. It's the few remaining unanimous systems that need to change to QMV.
So all I'm hearing is "you must never leave"
Sounds good they should take their time with this though but be persistent in developing it with all EU members in mind. Being too pushy with this can be counterproductive. They should do lots of research on all other EU member states and maybe even visit as many as they can.
I sure hope England doesn’t get involved with EU again, thought they learned the first time around.
@Wiegraf its why i will outright refuse any draft to fight for europe.. i have doubts anyone in NA is gonna go for a european war ever again
5:00 You marked Schengen, but didn't include Switzerland. Switzerland is in the Schengen area.
That's not going to work....
Aside from all those initiatives that will, I hope, turn out to be good ideas, I think there's a real need to remind everyone what the EU project is all about.
Nowadays, there are various European countries, both inside and outside EU, who have different views on what EU is about. Some see it as an economical free market space, some see it as a protection against Russia, some see it as a development boost,...
But the EU has been founded as a project that aims toward further integration between its members states, and has always been about that.
Some countries, like UK, sabotaged this idea from the inside, by trying to turn it into only a free market zone. And thus nowadays there's a lot of confusion about what's the aim of EU. So I think we really need to all gather, discuss this, and reaffirm the original goal of EU. So that countries don't join by having the wrong expectations.
For those who are not on board with this, the European community should provide the adequate framework.
nah, Start with framework of basic laws. take the money control out of the hands of Eurozone. my suggestion bitcoin! then each state(country) handles it own affairs' and negotiates and compete for residence in side of Euro zone. The best system will get more money. and because they can make it, they will before to improve or go broke.
@@terrorist_nousagi8747 there are for people with cell phone world wide than Bank account. u really have no idea what u are talking about. u sound smarter if u do not talk. maybe before u go making comment u should school yourself.
@@davidmichaels299 In Romania more than a quarter of the population lives in poverty. You guys completely forget that there are still many individuals who do not have access to basic modern needs.
The original goal of the EU was to intertwine their economies to prevent WWIII, nothing more, nothing less. France and Germany are having other intentions with it. France wants to use the EU to boost their local economy while Germany wants to use the EU to create the Fourth Reich in which member states are just new Bundesländer of the Bundesrepublik. They want to force everyone's army into the Bundeswehr, they want to dictate their immigration policy onto every EU member state and they try to capitalize on the green energy investments of their neighboring states.
It's not sabotage if you were never interested in anything other than free trade in the first place (which is what the EEC was originally all about). Don't blame us for constantly changing the goalposts. This idea just reads like a shopping list of thing the EU wants from non-EU nations - in return for what exactly?
Let’s federalise
How is his proposal different than the COuncil of Europe? We already have a forum for EU and non-EU members.
As a British guy, we hate brexit, we didn’t want to leave the EU. Excited to see if we can somewhat come back in
Speak for yourself and don't assume you speak for all of us.
@@saundyuk 😂😂😂
After the antics that macron carried out against the uk why would Britain want to rejoin the European Union ,we voted out so we stay out not having to follow another countries rules and regs,
Not all the countries who are not in the Eurozone and Schengen do not want to do so. Some are simply not let in by the big guys. It’s wrong to say that they don’t want further EU-integration
Joining the Eurozone has clear rules and metrics that need to be respected. Its not a case of being not let in by the big guys but not adhereing to long standing and well known rules. The same thing goes for shengen. There is a framework with clear milestones and goals of whats expected before a country can joing the shengen zone. So its not wrong to say these countries dont want to integrate. If they are not willing to make (sometimes tough changes) to their spending and monetary policy then they cant joing the Eurozone in the same way if they dont want to make changes to their border agencies, goods controls etc they cant join shengen.
The countries which are not in EUR are the lucky ones..
@@Gunbuster1000 This is correct as long as it’s true. For instance, it’s a good argument as to why Ukraine could not be simply let into EU soon, until they work towards meeting the criteria. However, taking the Schengen accession cases of Romania and Bulgaria into account, when the criteria have been objectively met for years, which is being testified by the independently made reports handed in to the EU, and the reason they’re not inside is because some countries veto them on unprooven allegations, it’s not a matter of these two countries not wanting to put the effort in, but rather strategical ill-will of the EU12. Similarly with the Eurozone, if you go to Brussels and say “we wanna start the procedures for adopting the Euro. Reaching the parameters will hurt our people economically. Will you at least let us in once we get there?” If you can’t get this guarantee, what’s the point of putting your country through more economic stress and achieving nothing? Eastern European countries are already having the same consumer prices as in the west, at often less than half the salaries, in an attempt to show their efforts for integration. It’s a very sheltered and confortable point of view to say they don’t want to make sacrifices. It’s the west who doesn’t want to take these risks, at the cost of the EU ideals.
@@nyali2 Was anybody forced to join the € at gunpoint?
Greetings from Bavaria
Let's GO Big Mac!
Your content is soo good, keep it up
"A very French thing: Make a proposal first and figure out how it would work after"
Unlike Brexit, which of course was first worked out in detail before it was decided on...
Pass the salt?
@@saundyuk I'm not French and I don't care about Brexit either. I'm just pointing out the irony in that statement. Feel free to rebuke my argument
@@NLTops Didn't say you were. I would point out that this fantasy of Brexit being something that could have been worked out beforehand is just that - a fantasy. Brexit was a negotiating process between two parties that could only take place after the event and whatever anyone might claim, no-one had a crystal ball to be able to know the outcome at the end of the negotiations.
@@saundyuk And if that's how it were presented you would have a point. But it wasn't. The only concrete notion was "leaving the EU" and they let the British public fantasize and salivate over what the details might entail by feeding them loads of empty promises and meaningless slogans.
Sure, you'd need a crystal ball to know the outcome. But you wouldn't need one to deduce that the EU wasn't going to make it easy or pleasant as to dissuade others to follow in the UK's footsteps. Not to mention the practical difficulties (such as the Ireland issue, which has recently reared its ugly head again) were completely ignored.
I'd say my point still stands.
@@NLTops I'd say for every person 'salivating and fantasising' over leaving the EU, there seems to be another doing exactly the same about rejoining it. When it comes right down to it, the only difference is whether you believe the EU is an institution that's all about centralisation of power with none of the oversight of even the most basic democracy, or a fluffy kumbaya utopia full of endless rainbows that only wants the best for people.
The truth is probably somewhere in the middle - it's just which side of that middle that's open to interpretation. The EU is marmite - you either love it or you hate it.
I was on board with the idea of a separate EU community for more outer countries, however then you went on to basically France looking to try take control on Europe and removing democracy again in Europe
That's basically what Macron wants. The way he treats France shows he doesn't tolerate regions having their own independence, they all should respond to "La République" and monsieur le président. A system like Germany has, or Belgium or Switzerland for that matter, is madness in the mind of Macron - even though their democracies are arguably much better.
at 4:41, you show Slovakia as not being part of the Eurozone; it has been a part of it since 2009. Otherwise, great video!
Everyone should read Jacques Attali’s “Breif history of the future.” It’s something to think about considering this topic.
I don't see this as a pressing problem for the UK. The problem is that the EU has a reputation as control freaks lacking democratic accountability. Perhaps they could start by giving the EU "parliament" more powers, like being able to initiate and amend legislation and sanction and dismiss all EU commissioners and Presidents as well as all senior EU civil servants. Perhaps the Parliament should have the power to appoint an auditor general with the authority to examine and report on all aspects of EU accounts.
macron is a piece of shit hunting around for control for is overlords, If he wanted to help start with framework of basic laws. take the money control out of the hands of Eurozone. my suggestion bitcoin! then each state (country) handles it own affairs' and negotiates and compete for residence and there taxes in side of Euro zone. The best system will get more bitcoin. and because they can make it, they will before to improve or go broke. Bitcoin is native to the internet, and would scale. country who adopt early like El Salvador did will see massive economic gains as crypto assume it place as the world reserve currency. If Macron cared about France and not his international banking interests he would suggest something like this. But he suggesting more disgusting control of Europeans. Europeans would not be in a war if not for Marcon and Merkel
I totally agree with you that the European parliament should get the right to initiate new laws. But to my knowledge can the EU parliament already dismiss the EU commission.
1:56 Can someone give an explanation about this. How could Greenland leave the EU when it's a part of Denmark?
It was given some autonomy back then and left the EU
greenland never left the EU. the EU was formed in 1993. not sure how they managed to leave it in 1982.
Politically Greenland is a sovereign nation seperate from the state of Denmark. Both entities however, subscribe to the Kingdom of Denmark (similar to British Commonwealth). For Greenland it means their foreign and military affairs are left to Danish government (with representation), but their internal affairs are their own
@@oxenford539 yeah they left the EC European communities
@@billy_5658 they left the EC in 1985. their referendum was in 1982. video is full of mistakes.
Your Eurozone map (4:50/55) mixes up memberships of Slovakia (should be in / green) and Hungary (should be out / white)
There is a mistake in the euro zone map shown in 4:45. It shows that Hungary is in eurozone, but it is not. Hungary still uses Forint local currency. Slovakia on the other hand is eurozone member and uses Euro currency.
A "tiered" Europe would be a great idea, in theory.
It is clear that there is a number of countries (Belgium, the Netherlands, Austria, Sweden, Finland) which are far more integrated. They have a much better budget discipline than even Germany and France and it would make sense for them to accelerate integration and eventually political unity.
The lowest tier could serve those countries that have little budget discipline and or are still reluctant to accept EU values and fight corruption.
I see many problems, though, among which:
A ballooning of EU bureaucracy and endless procedural failures is the first that comes to mind.
An eternal dispute on how to allocate funds (why should virtuous Finland and Netherlands keep on subsidising the brats in Southern and Eastern Europe?).
We need great visionaries and great managers to implement such an idea.
What "EU bureaucracy" are you talking about pray tell? "EU bureaucracy" was a Brexiteer propaganda campaign.
@@MajinOthinus I think he's referring to slow and multilayered policy making but indeed, EU burocracy means everything and nothing in isolation.
"Virtuous Netherlands" act as a tax-haven proxy (or a tax-haven themselves) siphoning out enormous amounts of tax from the Southern and Eastern Europe, themselves getting a cut of the profits on the way.
Considering that Netherlands has an exemption that lower the amount of money it puts into the EU, I would not be surprised if Netherlands were actually benefiting off the Southern and Eastern Europe if we account for all flows.
@@MajinOthinus Wtf
@@MajinOthinus Do you not know what a beurocracy is or are you just unhinged?
I like the idea and hope that the discussion it starts will bear fruit. We need to keep reforming the EU and the way in which we cooperate to serve us best in the changing times
Giving some proper power to the parliament and not the other two branches would be a start.
nah, macron is a piece of shit hunting around for control for is overlords, If he wanted to help start with framework of basic laws. take the money control out of the hands of Eurozone. my suggestion bitcoin! then each state (country) handles it own affairs' and negotiates and compete for residence and there taxes in side of Euro zone. The best system will get more bitcoin. and because they can make it, they will before to improve or go broke. Bitcoin is native to the internet, and would scale. country who adopt early like El Salvador did will see massive economic gains as crypto assume it place as the world reserve currency. If Macron cared about France and not his international banking interests he would suggest something like this. But he suggesting more disgusting control of Europeans. Europeans would not be in a war if not for Marcon and Merkel
Dude…it’s 2am…did you have to show me such an exhausting video?
4:43 Not to be needy or anything but you forgot Slovakia ... We do have Euro as well and for a while now 13 years to be exact.
9:00 Can't say i am happy with seeing my own country on that list. Of course I have no say in the matter. There are no pro EU parties in Swedish politics.
I think expecting QMV is totally unrealistic a 90% member state majority I think is possible, you can always find 2 allies that will share your cause on fiscal or border policy, however this does not allow one country to for example carry out actions that harm themselves, their neighbours or Europe, because of course they cannot be expected to vote against themselves.
A system where 49% and 51% are always at odds would never work. And QMV could produce that given the divides in Europe: West vs East, Center vs Mediterranean vs North, Catholic vs Protestant(This is what the Northern Irish fought over), Baltics, Language divides, etc. Europe is too divided to ever federalize.
Former Finnish PM Alexander Stubb came out with 3-stage Confederation plan:
-European Union: Stays same but no unanimity.
-European Community: For candidates and applicants. It's like a waiting room but they can join partly EU decision-making and ministerial meetings.
-European Area: Having those that don't want to join EU with economic and security cooperation.
After Macron's suggestion, European Economic Area can be transformed into European Area which addresses not only Single Market but also political matters but it has no deepen integration compared to EU. It can be an organization of EU members, EFTA members and associated microstates. Three things needed to be achieved: United Kingdom joining EFTA which can make them an EEA member later, Switzerland joining EEA after narrowly rejecting in 1992 referendum and microstates which had a customs union with EU also approving it. Candidates might be included too but I'm not sure since EU member Croatia is not full member to EEA yet.
There is a little mistake at 4:53, Slovakia most certainly has adopted Euro despite the image showing otherwise…
the veto in the EU needs to be removed - countries like hungary should not have the right to block the progress of the whole union
No-net-contributor should not be allowed to vote
Well then grow a pair and actually sanction them or kick them out? How many times by now have you threatened to do it and still done bugger all?
Macron has more chance of Elvis coming back on a comeback tour than the UK re-joining some form of the EU, we are out, and we like it. The EU since Brexit has hardly showered itself with success.
Northern Ireland is going well. And the economic projections the torries made for post brexit have been absolutely correct.
Cause the UK has been doing just great. When North Ireland and Scotland left, y’all gonna keep doing your island thing?
@@mayertheresa7450 tbf I'm supported Brexit and Scotland cannot and will not leave the UK, plus recent news says Boris is going to ditch the see border and bring Ireland back. But I don't oppose the UK being apart of a more non centralised, non bureautic, free european treaty organisation which does not limit independent governments and create restrictions but instead goals to aim for.
@@Mossy06. Northern Ireland won’t be too happy…
@@simondahl5437 Correction: Northern Irish NATIONALISTS who've used this from the start to speed up unification with the Republic won't be too happy.
Just want to point out, in the infographic at 4:54, there is a big mistake, slovakia is a member of eurozone and hubgary is not, not the other way around.
i mean they could start slow... replacing unanimity with a 90% agreement limit ...
His policies are so clever! I hope they get implemented and work out the way he intends
Simping for macron?🙈
@@hansgruber788 i guess
come live in france to see how it feels linving under his rule.
A multi level european integration doesn't means the ricj west will leave the poor east behind, or the big will leave the small behind.
It means, the one thats wants to integrate further can (for example, the baltic state) and those who don't want to integrate because of value (hungary or denmark) don't prevent the other from integrating further.
On your current 2 tier: the 1st example was good; the 2nd wasn't, it assumes that the EU and Schengen are part of the same thing which they are not!
Getting a strange audio issue during this video, a hissing noise like air escaping a tire from my left ear, checked other youtube videos and it seems to just be here
It's not much a club approach, but a matter of weight.
When you are a country of lets say 10m people, you can't possibly hope to have the same weight as the group that have 300m
And this is also why the unanimity vote is kinda bs in current EU.
Countries like Hungaria or Danemark (to take polar opposites) gain a lot from Europe, but also have a lot of power when it comes to halting the decision that would benefit most of the countries.
Unanimity vote is almost always a bad thing. Majority votes of like 80% could be a better solution
Macron wants to make the EU only France,Germoney,Italy,Spain,Belgium and Holland while the rest will be called EU friends😂
That would have made more sense and make things better for everyone. Have a strong core made out of democratic countries with shared values ( real shared values, not just on paper ), and have a trade agreement with the rest.
What happened with the other 10 out of 12 provinces?
I'm not even sure he's that keen on Spain. And your forgot Luxembourgh.
@@dee-jay45 Luxemburg and Austria , etc. the point is to only have countries that are on the same page ideologically and have performing economies.
With Eire and luxemburg
Ok here is whart I have in mind :
Tier 1 requirement : EU Membership only
Tier 2 requirement : EU Membership + Euro + Schengen + no rebate + no bullshit opt-out (yes I'm watching you Denmark) + same corporate taxes (Yes I'm watching you Ireland) + Strict level of requirement regarding Rule of Law and freedom of press (Yes I'm watching you Hungary/Poland) + Common army (the deciding factor)+ every tier 2 members have to votes the same for every decision to make in the EU council, this common vote is decided between tier 2 members at qualified majority + more EU funding than in tier 1 (in practice, tier 2 member will slowly abandonned the funding of tier 1 member).
If this is implemented, I think France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Benelux countries will be the first tier 2 members, but soon enough when tier 1 EU funding will decrease even the most eurosceptic EU member will do whattever it takes to be tier 2. Do it Macron, we can't be blocked forever by the CEE.
We do not even have to vote at unanimity to implement this tier 2 thing, a "new" organisation with only tier 2 members can be done without needing the permission of tier 1 members (it can be a different organisation).
Forget about bringing UK, they are trouble, it's not worth the hassle.
Yes, the UK is trouble, the Spanish, Napoleon & Hitler all noticed that, and now the EU has cottoned on. Good thing!
I agree - forget about us. Move on already.
Seems like a solid idea, a mechanism for coordinating a wider European response to international topics seems like a fine idea
I am Swedish and i wish to god that we would be more like Denmark, keep our fucking currency, be more conservative.
@@well-blazeredman6187 For sure, i fucking love denmark and everytime i hear how they handle a situation im always like "FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK CANT THE KALMAR UNION COME BACK OR SOMETHING!?!??!?!"
I'm Swedish as well and I completely agree... Sometimes I wish Denmark would invade and occupy Sweden. Can't believe I'm saying this.... I'm so sick and tired of Swedish politicians.
‘…if it could bring Britain back into Europe…’
What?
Britain has been part of Europe ever since the concept of Europe and it continues to be so.
Please use accurate language.
But you understand what he meant didn’t you?
Fell of my chair at "Montagun" hahaha
You can pronounce Montaigne as "Mont" and the "-tain" of mountain with a more nasal sound
2:12 It’s prononced in French like Montain