Language barrier may be the single most important obstacle for further integration. English fluency is growing too slowly due to political reasons, so universal translators may be the one technology EU needs to become and act as a single entity.
Within Europe you have cultures and mentalities as diverse as you can imagine. Language is the least of the problem.
This is also why many well-meaning individuals, NGO's, governments and other institutions that try to apply knowledge about something that 'worked' in one EU country to another invariably fail.
Comparing Greece to Sweden, The UK to Romania, Serbia to Portugal, Italy to Scotland, Poland to France and Spain to Germany can shed some light on what makes - and keeps - Europe as fragmented as it is.
The Euro, with all its faults, has done more for European unification than any other measure, Schengen being a close second.
Now we're looking at a slow but sure decline in that feeling. Most people have an identity rooted in some rough geographical location, I've yet to hear someone call themselves a European first.
€ and Schengen erase currency and national boundaries. They rock! Whenever I travel to a country within the EU that is not in the €-zone I cringe.
While cultures and mentalities _do_ indeed vary quite a lot let that be seen as a _good_ and healthy thing.
I consider myself European first, British Islander second.
Have to figure out what other boundaries can be erased while at the same time respecting difference. More integration and yet more federation at the same time. The EU could pour money into pre-third level foreign language learning and into machine translation projects? That'd be cool.
Having lived in several European countries myself (Spain, Germany, France, Netherlands, Switzerland) I can only agree with the first part of the statement. It is not like California and Kansas are very similar either, yet they are part of the same country.
To me the current issue is not the people but politics, and the desire of sovereign countries not to relinquish power to a supranational entity. This is a process that takes time (and typically requires a catalyzer).
Whether the union will succeed or not, time will tell, but in the last 15 years Europe has clearly been converging (Schengen and currency being important aspects, to which I would add Erasmus programs and low-cost flights).
It is not there yet, and with the financial crisis from the last few years, the situation is more difficult at the moment; however, in my opinion if Europe wants to play a relevant geopolitical role vs the US, China, Russia, etc. it will be forced to step up its union efforts.
The sovereign 'countries' are imaginary constructs made real by physical, cultural and psychological factors, 'power' is such a psychological factor and I think it is far less of an item absent 'nationalism' and we're seeing a very strong resurgence of this in Europe right now. There isn't a country that does not have a far-right or far-left ultra nationalist political party that manages to get a substantial part of the vote. If anything happened at all during the last decade then it is that Europe's window for unity is slowly closing and that in some parts we're already regressing.
This gets expressed in an 'us versus them' mentality not seen since the 80's, the latest nice example of that is Germany deciding to start levying toll on foreigners for the use of the German roads. (Which given the location of Germany is for many people the equivalent of an in-escapable tax.)
So if you feel the Union is converging then that's great, I'm seeing the opposite, more and more nationalist sentiments, Greece possibly departing the Euro and maybe even departing the EU, the UK and possibly others no longer being a part of the union and more and more limitations placed on the original 'free travel of goods and people' mandate that enabled a lot of the EU to get closer.
So, no, it's not there yet and the way things are going we're not ever going to get there either.
The EU did a number of things very wrong, they tried to force the issue on a number of occasions and in fact succeeded in several of those but while they won those particular battles they lost the war in that the 'locals' are not Europe minded because they see downsides to it as well. And that's fine, but ramming unification down their throats definitely is one of the reasons all these backlashes found ground to sprout in and take hold.
Wilders, Le-Pen, the UK euro-skeptics, Greek nationalists and so on all have one thing in common: they use the anti-EU sentiment as their main driving force (and in the case of Wilders, also anti-Islam, but then again, he's simply a nutcase that has found some fear buttons that he can push, like all the other demagogues in history, which doesn't make him any less dangerous).
Two things actually. A very significant share of euro-skeptics, far right parties and movements are funded by Moscow. When Putin's and his cronies regime falls, European political landscape might change in a very unpredictable way.
What UK euro-sceptic party receives funding from Moscow?
http://www.ukpolitical.info/Donations.htm
http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/find-information-by-su...
http://search.electoralcommission.org.uk/Search?currentPage=...
For example, Le Pen's Front National got EUR 40M loan[0]. Also Greece’s Golden Dawn party, Belgium’s Vlaams Belang, Italy’s Northern League, Hungary’s Jobbik and the Freedom Party of Austria.[1]
An overview from The Guardian[2]
[0]http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/40m-of-russia...
[1]http://www.theweek.co.uk/europe/61498/russia-funds-french-na...
[2] http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/feb/16/russian-resurge...
[0]http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/mar/31/nigel-farage...
It reminds of Churchill's quote after the Nazis attacked the Soviet Union:
If Hitler invaded Hell I would make at least a favourable reference to the devil in the House of Commons.
Churchill had previously been War Minister at the time of the intervention in the Russian Civil War against the Bolsheviks and was a strong anti-communist.
[NB Just to be clear - I strongly disagree with UKIP policies, but I don't believe for a minute that they'd actually take money from Moscow - it would be political suicide if it was ever found out].
As for the UK, I can't really say. I think the referendum in 2017 will end with a "stay" vote, but it will depend a lot on Greece's situation and how France/Germany deal with the UK issues regarding the EU in 2016.
We have to keep in mind they were not always like this. Willingness to be part of a larger whole is key. EU members are not keen and politicians are playing divide and conquer with the EU.
The fear buttons they play are extraordinarily dangerous.
Isn't it the same with US?
>... try to apply knowledge about something that 'worked' in one EU country to another invariably fail.
Have any source for that information?
> I've yet to hear someone call themselves a European first.
Well, your anecdotal evidence matches the study data[0]. Only three percent of EU citizens identify as "european first". However more people identify as "nationality and European" than "only my nationalty".
>Language is the least of the problem.
Common language for 90+ of citizens would go a long way to establish common culture.
>Europe is not a single entity and never will be.
We'll see :)
[0]http://www.debatingeurope.eu/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Euro...
After trekking through the US and being in 40+ states in total I'd say there are significant local variations but even the furthest extremes do not come close to what you'll encounter on a few hundred kilometer drive through the EU.
> Have any source for that information?
Yes. For instance the (well intentioned) attempts of the EU to manage public works and utility programs in countries that look like they could use a hand with these.
> Common language for 90+ of citizens would go a long way to establish common culture.
You mean like Canada, Australia, England, Ireland, Scotland and the United States have a common culture?