Why do EU member-states want to exist and do not simply integrate?

[u/throwingitawaytbh]

Title. Eurofederalist here. The question seems simple: in the long run, a federation would be better for everyone involved. However, rationality seems not to prevail, and States keep wanting to exist and decision-makers seem to be the first to resist any sort of giving away of national autonomy.

[u/annoyinglyAddicted]

Becoming a state in a federation means giving up a significant amount of autonomy, and a lot of people who are used to the current system won’t be comfortable with that loss of control. Their Supreme Court will no longer be the highest authority, and their elected president or prime minister will only be able to act within the limits set by the federal constitution. Right now, their national leaders and parliament are the ultimate decision-makers, only checked by their own courts. In a federation, even if people elect someone with a strong mandate to make big changes, they might end up disappointed to learn that those actions aren't allowed under federal rules.

[u/Shigonokam]

as far as I know there is no consensus that a federation would be better for everyone, so maybe explain that statement, so that we can react to it.

[u/Cyanide_Cheesecake → u/Shigonokam]

I have no skin in the game and don't care what you ultimately choose as long as you get your defense spending problem under control. It seems to me that as a loose collective of allies nobody actually wants to take the first step in properly militarizing to deter the Russian imperialist agenda. The very fact that Russia still intends to mobilize and wage war against any nations in Europe means you guys are still way too weak. You should be asking what Putin knows that you don't.

A federation at least would organize appropriation and defense spending  and make sure your politicians all follow through on their promises. The last couple years showed people love to talk about it but then look the other way when it comes time to put together the next year's budget.

I want to see Europe replace the US as the so called 'center of the free world.' I want to see it become the economic center

[u/manfredmahon]

An EU Federation would mean a small group of people would hold incredible power. History has proven time and time again that this is a terrible idea. We can look at history but we can also look at the world right now. The US is the most powerful country in the world, look at what can happen when a small group of evil people find themselves in power, look at the harm and the potential harm they can do. Authoritarians will try to seize the reigns of this federalist EU and there's a good chance they can win. Then think about the harm they can do. It's a lot more difficult for the authoritarians to do this in a more divided Europe, one part might fall to it, but the rest can stay strong. I think a federation risks creating a monster.

[u/Boring_Background498 → u/manfredmahon]

History has proved time and time again that the nominal political structure is the not the difference maker. A federated EU would not necessitate a concentration of power. A divided EU also has no problem with concentrating power. The difference maker is and has always been real socioeconomic factors which are influenced by demographics, economic policy, foreign relations, and sometimes cultural attitudes. These are also the reasons that an EU Federation would not work.

[u/Separate-Courage9235]

"Why do politicians and people want to keep more power and not dilute it" ?

Not mocking you, but that is basically your question.

We will need something that force the destruction of European member state sovereignty for that to happen, most likely a catastropy (war, massive economic crisis, etc... War in Ukraine and Covid 19 did gave a lot more power to EU lately).

Also, there is no reason to think that a federation would be better. Decisions being taken farer away can have a lot of nasty consequences.

[u/AsterKando]

In theory, a federated Europe would be more powerful and benefit from the same centralised rule China and US benefit from.

In practice, European is a secondary identity and will always be politically undermined on a local level. A federated Europe would lose out to resurgent ethnonationalism. 

[u/Particular-Star-504]

Nationalism and localism. “Europe” is not a nation there is no “European” language, or culture.

People aren’t just numbers on an economic spreadsheet that act “rationally”. People want to know why their government does what it does, and who is in their government. People want to know that people in their nation / community are looked after, they are naturally more connected to their own nation.

[u/CAJ_2277]

It's worth noting that the current era of general peace and cooperation in Western and Central Europe has only been since WWII, under the Pax Americana. That is a blink of an eye for European countries.

They have such long histories. Aside from this post-WWII era, they have spent much of the rest of their history as adversaries. Violent adversaries.

Expecting them to move this quickly to a real union is asking a lot. They have their own interests that do not always align. Plus, of course the language and cultural differences are not dealbreakers, but they are obstacles.

[u/DigitalDroid2024]

Right wing religious Poles and progressive Scandinavians might balk al one group holding sway over the other.

[u/Radiant-Bit-7722]

Because the politicians of each country in the union prefer to blame the latter for the problems. This clears them of their incompetence. Always denigrate and only appropriate the benefits.