4 ms·

"Europe" is, unlike the US, not a single entity. Yes, we have European Union which helps a lot, but it is not complete (and certainly wasn't in the time when Mi

• saubeidl 11mo ago
  > "Europe" is, unlike the US, not a single entity It really needs to be, though, that's kind of the crux of it. Federate or die off, it's time to get rid of old tribal thinking. We're all Europeans.
  • martijnvds 11mo ago
    Tell that to the right-wing nutjobs who all want their "<country code>XIT"
  • AllegedAlec 11mo ago
    Please god no.
  • ramon156 11mo ago
    I can't fathom why you would give one parlement all the power. This is the root issue of America right now, individual states have less and less power every year.
    • bojan 11mo ago
      Otherwise you get an economy stifling patchwork of regulations, which is what we have within the EU now. Further, it'd probably be two Chambers, and we have proportional representation, which should make a slide to fascism a bit more difficult.
    • concinds 11mo ago
      America is already a country. The EU isn't. You could give the EU a metric ton more power and they'd still be more decentralized than the halcyon days of the US that you reference.
    • input_sh 11mo ago
      I would argue that the root issue in America right now is that you have one guy that can pass 200+ executive orders in less than a year completely bypassing the other two supposed branches of government. There's no such position or a branch in the EU. None of the three can make any sort of change of their own.
      • hulitu 11mo ago
        > There's no such position or a branch in the EU. cough vdL cough
        • disgruntledphd2 11mo ago
          She's basically a civil servant for the Council and Parliament.
        • input_sh 11mo ago
          She's the head of one of the three branches, she doesn't get to sign a piece of paper and for that to instantly become a law. Neither does her branch as a whole. At most I would concede that she's way more of a household name than her predecessors, but that doesn't automatically mean she holds more power.
      • pessimizer 11mo ago
        The executive can't bypass the courts with an executive order, unless you've seen something I haven't. The reason Congress doesn't do anything is because it ceased to be a functioning body sometime around the AUMF. Congresspeople realized that doing anything other than what the donors paid for is fraught with risk. Better to watch things being done and complain about it. The UK went the same way, concentrating all power in the current government with even backbenchers being absolutely powerless. I guess the only thing saving the EU from the same fate is its powerlessness and indecisiveness. The people who run it are certainly insane in the same way as the leaders of the UK and the US. You're both crippled from your lack of federalization and protected by it. edit: In the US, our real problem is that our executive (including the intelligence agencies) can do whatever it wants without an executive order or a coherent legal rationale, they will simply never be prosecuted. The next executive will proclaim that the illegal acts under the last one will never be tolerated again, pardon everybody who did it, and make those acts legal from now on.
    • saubeidl 11mo ago
      It might not be ideal and wildly swing the pendulum every couple of years, but looking at American centralization from our end, it still seems more functional somehow. At least you guys can get something done. Imagine if every state governor in the US had veto power over federal legislation. Imagine trying to get anything done that would require buy-in from both California and Alabama. That's the situation we find ourselves in.
    • tomrod 11mo ago
      The root issue in the US is regulatory capture. Easier to do with one parliament, but not impossible with dozens. The US has been fighting corporatism vs. oligarchy since the cold war ended, with regulatory capture as a primary tool in both tool chests. There are some simple policy changes, politically unsavvy in the US, that a federated EU could implement to induce better outcomes.
  • sharpy 11mo ago
    Intellectually, I think people agree with that. But I think the weight of history works against it. When you have a history filled with war, and intense competition...
  • vunderba 11mo ago
    What could go wrong with more centralization of power… https://reclaimthenet.org/eu-council-approves-new-chat-control-mandate-pushing-mass-surveillance https://reclaimthenet.org/eu-council-approves-new-chat-contr...
    • saubeidl 11mo ago
      This article is about the Council, which is comprised of the heads of the various nation states, i.e. the positions more centralization of power would get rid of.
    • ahartmetz 11mo ago
      Sarcasm aside, what could go wrong is what is going wrong: the democracy is a little too indirect so that it feels like the EU leadership is governing itself.
  • freehorse 11mo ago
    Europe is too heterogeneous. What you see as europe is not what others may see as europe.
    • canyp 11mo ago
      It always struck me funny how Americans refer to it as "Europe". Like, "I traveled to Europe this summer"; what does that even mean, lol. It's like their country's land mass is so large that they intuitively assume that other entities must have a large mass too, and see homogeneity where there is none.
      • machomaster 11mo ago
        It would be like Russians traveling to America, but making no distinction between Canada and Mexico. Except that Russians don't do that. This is an entirely and purely American problem.
        • nxor 11mo ago
          This analogy makes no sense.
          • machomaster 11mo ago
            This was not an analogy. It was an additional example to add to the parent's observation. As well as to dispute that it had anything to do with people from countries with big land mass.
            • nxor 10mo ago
              There are clueless people from many places, not just the US. Europeans refer to Asia as Asia. Is that a problem too?
      • nxor 11mo ago
        Europeans also use the word Europe.
  • bregma 11mo ago
    It's been tried a number of times. It has never worked out well.
    • LtWorf 11mo ago
      Right now the USA is working hard to prevent it from happening.
  • p2detar 11mo ago
    I think this is the logical next step, but I feel like it won’t be based on the EU but assembled entirely parallel by some of EU‘s members, and this seems consequential to me.
  • kakacik 11mo ago
    As Swiss resident coming originally from EU country, how to put it politely... fuck that. EU does some good but its top politicians are absurd obscure career bullshitters (Leyen, who the heck likes her and whom she represents? Certainly not eastern EU, she represents everything wrong with EU though. She is so lost and yet untouchable, ie still pushes for destruction of whole European automotive industry while playing her political games. EU parliament is a behemoth of corrupt ultra bureaucracy and so on. Certainly not a leader for whole continent). For poor countries in the east, EU is salvation, it dumps billions every year on them that are promptly stolen by cleptocratic governments (I know this darn too well as coming from one such place and literally everybody there knows this, you guys are fools for allowing this for decades). Yeah, all you westerners, you don't even bother to check whats happening with your truckloads of money as long as politicians don't stick out like Orban or Fico. And even if they do, all that happens is some PR statements and things go on as usually. For Swiss for example, it would be a massive downgrade in many aspects - sovereignty, general freedom, performance, agility in ever-changing world, freedom of self-determination, and obviously economical power and wealth. They themselves voted in public vote to not join, same for NATO. EU should be more like Switzerland, that I honestly believe is the only general recipe how long term old continent can compete and be peer to behemoths like US or China. Its not about this topic or that program, but general working and mindset of society. But good luck that western EU egos would ever accept that somebody found a more effective and way more sustainable way of functioning within European dominion. So its a path to stagnation, I see it as inevitable. Harder working, more clever countries not laying comfortably deep in their unsustainable social systems, bureaucracy and corruption will catch up and move far beyond EU in upcoming decades, and those further like US will keep pushing beyond whats possible for EU. Maybe bigger war with russia would actually change that mindset not sustainable in 2025, but it could also mean collapse and utter catastrophe. EU is weak and slow and lost, in times when its really bad idea.
    • trinix912 11mo ago
      So what's your proposed alternative? For every country to stick to their own stuff and wish for the best? Have you forgotten what a hassle it was to do international trade before your East European country was a part of the EU? EU is far from perfect but it's still better than pretending member countries can do it all on their own.
  • anonzzzies 11mo ago
    I agree with you but until we speak the same language, this is going to take a while. I am Dutch, speak Dutch, French, German, Spanish and Portuguese (and Mandarin) rather well, but I speak mostly English to prove a point as I believe we should pick a language (does not have to be English but seems the most obvious). I won't see this in my lifetime, nor my childrens or grandchildren. With easily accessible and massive funding by the EU for issues like this would get a lot of uniting done without more federating. I easily can point out 1000s of people who would spend their time working on EU sovereign/open source office 365, ai, aws etc etc the rest of their working lives and beyond, but it needs to make money and there is no money. Both investor money and EU money are incredibly hard to secure here for these type of efforts. Not impossible but very hard.
  • spragl 11mo ago
    >> "Europe" is, unlike the US, not a single entity > >It really needs to be, though, that's kind of the crux of it. > >Federate or die off, it's time to get rid of old tribal thinking. We're all Europeans. OK, let us play this game... China, Japan, Taiwan and the Koreas "really needs to be" a single entity. Theyre all East Asian. USA, Canada and Mexico "really needs to be" a single entity. Theyre all North Americans. Nigeria, Algeria, Somalia, and so on "really needs to be" one entity. Theyre all Africans. It is obvious where this is going, and it is not some place most people want to be. You never explained the rationale behind the need you think there is. You just stated your opinion. But your rationale would be much more interesting to hear.
    • saubeidl 11mo ago
      China and the US are the two superpowers right now. Together, they are of about the same scale as a united Europe. If we want to play in the same league as them and not be subjugated by them, uniting is our only way forward. United we stand, divided we fall.
      • nxor 11mo ago
        China has much more people.
• skirge 11mo ago
  if we talk beaurocracy EU is very well consolidated: "you can't do that", everyone says consistently.
  • bojan 11mo ago
    This is a popular meme, but compared to the combined regulation of 27 member states, the EU as a whole is doing great.
  • manuel_w 11mo ago
    What exactly is overly bureaucratic in the EU? I as an European get the feeling people usually hate on the EU just because it dares to interfere with local legislation. But that's its job. And usually the EU interferes for a good reason. Usually because member countries falling back to only thinking about themselves and forgetting that we Europeans are in this shit together. > you can't do that It's good that you can't call sparkling wine that's not from the Champagne "Champagne". It's good that you can't screw over flight passengers the way they do in the US. It's good that you can't annoy customers with phone power sockets that change with every model. When I hear about actual examples of excess bureaucracy, it's usually on the country-level.
    • TulliusCicero 11mo ago
      When people talk about the EU, they don't necessarily mean the EU proper, just like many "US" problems are more at the state or local level. People often mean "within the EU", including national regulations that may be widespread.
      • trinix912 11mo ago
        Then they should say that, not bash on the EU as a whole.
        • TulliusCicero 11mo ago
          And yet, people will still say that the US has shit public transit, even if NYC is mostly fine. If you expect generalizations to be perfect all the time, you'll be persistently disappointed, and probably a hypocrite to boot.
• TulliusCicero 11mo ago
  This is true, but it's also a fixable problem. The issue I've seen is that there isn't really the political will to fix it. Europeans broadly seem uncomfortable giving up national sovereignty when it comes to digital issues (including those that impact scaling businesses), so they implicitly choose the status quo that makes it hard for software/internet businesses to succeed. Literally in this thread you can see Europeans who are against greater federalization. And their objections are entirely understandable, but at the same time, can't exactly have your cake and eat it too. If you insist on 27 different sets of regulations to protect certain interests, however valid, you can't exactly be surprised when that makes scaling businesses rather challenging.
  • vladms 11mo ago
    Digital can probably be fixed easier. Energy independence on the other hand was a more stupid thing not to target (like Germany closing nuclear reactors, then buying gas from people that thought they could do whatever they want...).
    • adrianN 11mo ago
      The technology for energy independence has only been developed in the last few years. Before electric cars everyone was dependent on oil. We’re very close to the tipping point where renewables outcompete everything else and all sectors get electrified. Then energy independence becomes achievable.
  • mistrial9 11mo ago
    on the other hand, the USA got mass surveillance normalized, and an entire generation with serious emotional disturbances due to social media.. Many indicators of required cell phone IDs and airport biometrics still on the way. Is that a "win" in the long term?
    • nxor 11mo ago
      Europeans also use social media.
• dmitrygr 11mo ago
  Excuse denied. All they had to do was nothing. Instead they over-regulated way too early, before the industries could grow enough to support operating in such an environment. Now they are behind and will likely never catch up. The future of European tech is government handouts/scraps, collected by force from American companies.
  • vanviegen 11mo ago
    That doesn't feel true. I've founded several companies and talk to many other founders in the Netherlands. I've never experienced or heard of government regulation (though often somewhat annoying of course) being an inhibiting factor.* Funding opportunities are nearly absent though. And it seems that buying 'local' software has never been a consideration (until now). On the contrary: I've seen many cases where EU/national products were pushed out of the market by US products that came later and were (subjectively) worse. They were way better funded though. And, because of that or because of being American, they were considered to be more serious/trustworthy companies. Also, they could afford to flood the market with dump prices, until local competition was basically gone. *: Okay, with one exception: hiring employees involves a lot of work and risk, and doesn't allow for fiscally attractive stock plans.
    • dmitrygr 11mo ago
      …and that’s why all the major big tech is dutch. Amazon, google, meta, apple, Netflix, nvidia. All Dutch
      • vanviegen 11mo ago
        Sorry, I really don't understand how your response relates to my earlier comment.
• baby 11mo ago
  Right but as an entity it can also do quite the damage. Cookie popups come to mind.