Just watching this video here:

Now, I know that the US and the EU have this sort of rivalry thing going on: who’s currency is worth more, who influences the Third World countries more, who has the more desperate-to-enter illegal immigrants, etc.

However, as noted in this article about the EU’s head honcho for foreign relations, the EU, in its very nature, is different from the United States, not only in how it deals with other countries (in this case, Syria), but how the member nations interact with each other.

In fact, I just realized something about the EU right about now.

Unlike most other countries or federations, in which a given region’s culture or language is deprecated in favor of the greater union (be it the US or Russia), the EU doesn’t act as a governing, sovereign body. In fact, the notion of sovereignty in the EU has been relegated to the member states, who still retain their diplomats and embassies in other countries.

Plus, the member nations retain their own official languages, which are also recognized on the EU’s level with, theoretically, the same amount of officiality as the official languages of their other, fellow member nations.

The only country to which I can safely compare this aspect of the EU is Canada, to an extent. There, the province of Quebec possesses French as the sole official language of provincial affairs, and the language is also recognized on the federal language, officially, on par with English. Plus, Quebec has its own representation in La Francophonie, as do other provinces which possess French as an official language of government and education.

However, other than that exception, Quebec doesn’t possess any separate foreign representation in other countries or international organizations.

So the EU has this feature at present, which seems to benefit the member states.

Plus, the EU seems much more conducive to the idea of new countries (especially potential member states) being born, such as Kosovo or Catalonia.

So what do I see in the EU? What makes it so different from other federations?

In the EU, I see the decline of sovereignty and nationalism as driving forces for policy, both foreign and domestic.

I see countries gaining and retaining their independence and nationhood without having to engage in a bloody, Bosnia-like hate-fuck.

I see the distancing of the politics of governance away from the sensitivities of culture (religion, language, etc.).

Is that a good thing, though?

Granted, this model might not work in other areas, particularly those which are culturally homogenous over a wide stretch of land.

Plus, the attempts to replicate the effect of the EU in other places are having a gravely-hard time at implementation. The AU is still a dictator’s club (ECOWAS has fared a little better), CARICOM is still having to deal with being dependent upon other countries for its existence, and the SACN……well, its just an unfunny joke.

IMO, the reason why the European Union has worked is because it doesn’t have to depend upon other federations for survival of any kind. Its agricultural sector grows just enough to feed the population of the Union, and its public facilities and utilities are already taken care of.

Other federations will have to step their game up a bit in the next few decades.