欧洲人想要一个“欧洲合众国”吗？你想要吗？欧洲国家成为合众国的机会是多少？
Do Europeans want United States of Europe? Do you want United States of Europe? What are the chances for United States of Europe?
译文简介
谢邀。这实际上是三个独立的问题。
正文翻译
Do Europeans want United States of Europe? Do you want United States of Europe? What are the chances for United States of Europe?
欧洲人想要一个“欧洲合众国”吗？你想要吗？欧洲国家成为合众国的机会是多少？
评论翻译
很赞 ( 3 )
收藏
, former Senior Policy Adviser on EU Law at Civil Service (2000-2017)
Thank you for the A2A. There are actually three separate questions.
Do Europeans want a United States of Europe?
a. The population of Europe is about 740 million. Among such a large number, there will not be a single opinion that is shared by each and every one of them. Not all of the countries of Europe are members of the EU.
b. The total population of the Member States of the European unx is close to 450 million. The same answer applies. Among such a large number of people, there is no one opinion that is shared by everyone.
If the question were to be re-phrased as “do some Europeans want United States of Europe” it is likely that a small minority would want it.
2. Do you want a United States of Europe?
No, I do not!
3. What are the chances for a United States of Europe?
Very slim to non-existent. More than 20 European countries do not even belong to the European unx. They are unlikely to be interested in some form of political unx with the other 48 countries who are members of the Council of Europe.
It is currently impossible for the European unx to be transformed into a political unx of its 27 Member States. The treaties make no provision for it. Of course, it is always possible to agree new treaties. However, it is very highly unlikely that all of the existing Member States would join any new organisation that was a political unx.
谢邀。这实际上是三个独立的问题。
1.欧洲人想要一个欧洲合众国吗？
a. 欧洲的人口约为7.4亿。在这样一个庞大的数字中，不会有一个单一的意见被他们每个人所认同。还有并非所有的欧洲国家都是欧盟的成员。
b. 欧盟成员国的总人口接近4.5亿。同样的答案也适用。在如此众多的人口中，没有一种意见是所有人都认同的。
如果把问题改成"一些欧洲人是否想要欧洲合众国"，很可能只有少数人希望如此。
2. 你想要一个欧洲合众国吗？
不，我不想要！
3. 建立欧洲合众国的可能性有多大？
非常渺茫，甚至不存在。超过20个欧洲国家甚至不属于欧盟。他们不太可能对与其他48个欧洲委员会成员的国家建立某种形式的政治联盟感兴趣。
目前，欧盟不可能转变为其27个成员国的政治联盟。条约中没有这方面的规定。当然，总是有可能达成新的条约。然而，让所有现有的成员国都加入任何一个政治联盟的新组织是非常不可能的。
“This Treaty marks a new stage in the process of creating an ever closer unx among the peoples of Europe, in which decisions are taken as openly as possible and as closely as possible to the citizen.”
The words “ever closer unx” are often cited - out of their context - by deceitful people who want to mislead others into thinking that a politically-united super-state is an obxtive of the existing treaties. Such a creation is completely incompatible with taking decisions as openly as possible, and as closely as possible to the citizen, within a centralised super-state.
Closer unx among the peoples of Europe was desirable in the aftermath of World War II when the peoples had been bitter enemies and millions had lost their lives. The purpose of “ever closer unx among the peoples of Europe” is to heal the bitterness and ill-feeling that war created.
Seventy-five years after the end of the war, the European unx has had a huge measure of success in healing the wounds. France and Germany now cooperate in ways that were unimaginable in 1945.
Thanks for asking.
现有的条约包含以下文字。
"本条约标志着在欧洲各国人民之间建立一个越来越紧密的联盟的过程中进入了一个新的阶段，在这个过程中，决策尽可能公开，尽可能贴近公民。"
"越来越紧密的联合"这句话经常被那些想误导他人认为建立一个政治上统一的超级国家是现有条约的一个目标的欺骗者所引用--脱离其背景。然而这样的条约与在一个中央集权的超级国家内尽可能公开地、尽可能贴近公民地作出决定是完全不相容的。
在二战结束后，欧洲各国人民之间更紧密的联合是可取的，当时各国人民都是敌对的，数百万人丧生。欧洲各国人民之间更紧密的联合的目的是为了弥合战争造成的痛苦和恶感。
战争结束75年后，欧洲联盟在治愈创伤方面取得了巨大的成功。法国和德国现在的合作方式在1945年时是无法想象的。
谢谢你的提问。
A United States of Europe need not include all Europeans (and would likely just be the countries in the EU). After all not all countries in America, even North America, are in the United States of America.
一个欧洲合众国不需要包括所有的欧洲人（很可能只是欧盟的国家）。毕竟，并不是所有的美洲国家，甚至只是北美--都包含在美国。
Since there is no possibility of the EU Member States ever forming a United States of Europe, there is no likelihood of there ever being the organisation that you describe. For many of the EU 27, a unitary or federal state is anathema. Since it would require a new set of treaties, none of those would ever join it.
由于欧盟成员国不可能形成一个欧洲合众国，所以也不可能出现你所说的组织。对于欧盟27国中的许多国家来说，统一或联邦制国家是一种生理厌恶。因为它需要一套新的条约，所以这些国家都不会加入它。
Some do and some don’t.
From Brussels there certainly is a desire for it, and I think political leaders in other part of Europe also see it as sensible in an increasingly globalised world to come together to stand against the US, Russia, China and other rising threats.
The Referendums on the EU constitution a few years ago showed that there was an appetite even amongst largely pro EU countries for that sort of step.
However the EU does keep creeping its mandate so its courts are ruling on broader subjects like gay marriage, it is increasingly getting involved in national security, defence, policing and foreign policy. The Parliament is increasingly pushing for power and creeping its mandate and the Commission has become less of a neutral civil service and more politcal (that was particularly true under Juncker) So the direction of travel is definitely towards a federal state. The EU certainly invests alot in making people in the EU feel European first and their nationality second.
有些人想，有些人不想。
布鲁塞尔当然有这样的愿望，而且我认为欧洲其他地区的政治领导人也认为，在一个日益全球化的世界里，团结起来对抗美国、俄罗斯、中国和其他正在崛起的威胁是明智的。
几年前关于欧盟宪法的公投表明，即使在基本上支持欧盟的国家中，也有对这种步骤的渴望。
而且，欧盟确实在不断扩大其授权，所以它的法院正在对更广泛的主题进行裁决，如同性恋婚姻，它正越来越多地参与到国家安全、国防、警务和外交政策中。议会越来越多地推动权力，并逐渐扩大其任务，委员会已经变得不再是一个中立的公务员制度，而是更加政治化（在容克的领导下尤其如此），所以前进的方向肯定是走向联邦国家。欧盟当然会投入大量资金，使欧盟的人们首先感到自己是欧洲人，其次才是他们的国籍。
There are steps now to bring together budgetary policy as the 2008 crisis showed that a monetary unx without joined up economic and fiscal unx doesn’t work in a crisis. There needs to be wealth transfers just as there are in sovereign states between the winners of monetary unx namely Germany and the those that lost out when that tool was removed like Italy, Spain and Greece. Just as wealth is transfered from New York and California to Ohio, Michigan and Indiana by the federal government in the US.
So for comparsion the EU is kind of in the same stage of development as the US was during the Articles of Confederation period.
India would also be a good comparator in a state that has brought together alot of very different cultures, histories and languages into one federal state.
比利时前首相居伊·费尔霍夫施塔特和多年来议会中ALDE集团的领导人是这个愿景的积极倡导者。
现在有步骤将预算政策结合起来，因为2008年的危机表明，没有经济和财政联合的货币联盟在危机中是行不通的。需要进行财富转移，就像在主权国家中，在货币联盟的赢家（即德国）和那些在该工具被取消后失去的国家（如意大利、西班牙和希腊）之间进行财富转移。就像美国联邦政府将财富从纽约和加利福尼亚转移到俄亥俄、密歇根和印第安纳一样。
因此，作为比较，欧盟正处于与美国在《联邦条款》时期相同的发展阶段。
印度也是一个很好的比较对象，它将许多非常不同的文化、历史和语言汇集成一个联邦国家。
, M.Sc. Architecture and Urban Planning, Tampere University of Technology
Q: Do Europeans want United States of Europe?
A: No. Most Europeans are quite fond of nation-states.
We need multiple levels of government: local, regional, and national. We also need supranational organizations coordinating environmental protection and crisis response, settling trade disputes, etc. Most of these organizations are non-governmental.
Your question is, do Europeans prefer a closed federation*, such as Russia’s or United States’, to national sovereignty and EU cooperation?
No, they do not. They’re doing rather well as they are and with the treaties that they have. There are, however, going to be more agreements in the future, translating into increasing European integration.
问：欧洲人想要欧洲合众国吗？
答：不。大多数欧洲人都很喜欢民族国家。
我们需要多层次的政府：地方、区域和国家。 我们还需要超国家的组织来协调环境保护和危机应对，解决贸易争端等。这些组织大多是非政府组织。
你的问题是，比起国家主权和欧盟合作，欧洲人是否更喜欢封闭的联邦*，比如俄罗斯或美国的联邦？
不，他们不喜欢。他们现在的情况和他们所拥有的条约做得相当好。 然而，在未来会有更多的协议，转化为越来越多的欧洲一体化。
A: Slim to none in the foreseeable future. Such development can’t come to pass without a unanimous decision reached by the EU members.
My country doesn’t support it. We have a veto. There you go.
Not going to happen unless there’s a massive change in circumstances. The kind that would take place over a long period of time.
Maybe a shift in the so-called world order that would force the European unx to step up. If it was between us and someone else, I’d prefer that it was us. Not going to lie. I simply don’t think that it’s a relevant concern for the time being.
What you do need to be vigilant about as a member is protecting your ability to participate in the decision-making. Not losing that ever-important say. That means voting in the EU Parliament elections and generally electing representatives who are educated on how the European unx works.
问：欧洲合众国的机会有多大？
答：在可预见的未来，机会渺茫。 没有欧盟成员的一致决定，这种发展是不可能实现的。
我的国家不支持。我们有一个否决权。所以...
除非情况发生了巨大变化，否则不会发生。那种将在很长一段时间内发生的变化。
也许所谓的世界秩序的转变，会迫使欧盟站出来。如果是在我们和别人之间，我宁愿是我们。不打算撒谎。我只是不认为这在目前来说是一个急切的问题。
作为一个成员，你确实需要警惕的是保护你参与决策的能力。不要失去那个永远都非常重要的发言权。 这意味着在欧盟议会选举中投票，并普遍选举那些受过欧盟运作教育的代表。
A: I don’t. I don't support federalization of the European unx if the goal is the United States of Europe.
I support “the process of creating an ever closer unx among the peoples of Europe, in which decisions are taken as openly as possible and as closely as possible to the citizen”.
I'm in favor of promoting “…trust and understanding among peoples living in open and democratic societies…”.
These aren't just words. Democratic values and transparency mean a great deal to me.
In terms of power politics, my native Finland is a small fish in a shark tank. I have no desire for it to become a shark. I'm conditioned to dislike them.
Aggression, oppression, invasion, expansion.
The European unx, in my mind, is a shoal of fish swimming together in a coordinated manner. Sometimes looser and less coordinated. Other, closer together. Always in a state of change, its fundamental purpose remaining the same.
You see, the bond that keeps the fish together is agreement.
That’s what the EU is: a bundle of agreements.
I don’t know why it would be ideal to revert to a governance model of the past. I think we need to be more innovative than that.
*Some EU countries are confederations, but the topic is governance at a supranational level.
问：你想要欧洲合众国吗？
答：我不想要。 如果目标是欧洲合众国，我不支持欧盟的联邦化。
我支持"在欧洲各国人民之间建立一个越来越紧密的联盟的过程，在这个过程中，决策尽可能公开，尽可能贴近公民"。
我赞成促进"......生活在开放和民主社会的人民之间的信任和理解......"。
这些并不只是说说而已。民主价值和透明度对我来说意义重大。
就权力政治而言，我的祖国芬兰是鲨鱼池中的一条小鱼。我并不希望它成为一条鲨鱼。我不喜欢它们：
侵略、压迫、入侵、扩张。
欧洲联盟，在我看来，是一群鱼在一起协调地游泳。有时比较松散，不太协调。其他时候，则更紧密地结合在一起。 总是处于变化的状态，其基本目的保持不变。
你看，使鱼群聚在一起的纽带是协议。
这就是欧盟的情况：一堆的协议。
我不知道为什么恢复过去的治理模式会是一种理想。 我认为我们需要比这更多的创新。
*一些欧盟国家本身就是联盟，但这个话题是超国家层面的治理。
, European by reason
Do Europeans want United States of Europe?
I don't have recent figures, but it seems to me that populist propaganda has done its work and that the supporters of a more pronounced unx are currently in the minority.
Do you want United States of Europe?
Honestly, I don't know what the United States of Europe would be like. If it were to look like the USA with a large autonomy of the states, it would already be difficult to achieve. On the other hand, I can see the point of such a unx in a world where the superpowers are increasingly dictating their laws to the weakest. This was already obvious to the fathers of the EU as early as the Treaty of Paris in 1951.
What are the chances for United States of Europe?
Europe has not stopped losing ground since 1914 and it is time to reverse the direction of History. Our British friends tell us that we will soon be part of the Fourth Reich, and I respond to them that I am ready to speak only German if that is the price to pay so that my daughter and her descendants can enjoy the peace we have known since 1945. It is a position that may condamn myself to be treated as a collaborator, but which will be considered quite wise in half a century's time. Anyway, I don't care, I'll be dead then…
欧洲人想要欧洲合众国吗？
我没有最近的数据，但在我看来，民粹主义的宣传已经发挥了作用，支持更明显的联盟的人目前是少数。
你想要欧洲合众国吗？
说实话，我不知道欧洲合众国会是什么样子。如果它像美国一样，各州有很大的自治权，这都已经很难实现了。另一方面，在一个超级大国越来越多地对最弱小的国家指手画脚的世界里，我可以看到这样一个联盟的意义。早在1951年的《巴黎条约》中，欧盟的创始人就已经很清楚这一点。
欧洲合众国的机会有多大？
自1914年以来，欧洲一直没有停止过失地，现在是扭转历史方向的时候了。我们的英国朋友告诉我们，我们很快就会成为第四帝国的一部分，我回应他们说，我准备只说德语，如果这是让我的女儿和她的后代能够享受我们自1945年以来的和平要付出的代价。这个立场可能会使我被当“某奸”，但在半个世纪后，这将被认为是相当明智的。总之，我不在乎，反正到时候我已经死了......
“Our British friends tell us that we will soon be part of the Fourth Reich”
Current Germany is not the fourth Reich, provided they only have economic power, and France has military power, as well.
If that balance works out well, that is probably fine.
Also, we all speak English in France, not German.
We are probably living in the commonwealth, rather than the reich.
Too bad, Brexiters did not understand that…
"我们的英国朋友告诉我们，我们很快将成为第四帝国的一部分"
目前的德国不是第四帝国，只要他们只有经济实力，而法国也有军事力量。
如果这种平衡效果很好，那可能就很好。
另外，我们在法国都说英语，而不是德语。
我们可能会生活在英联邦，而不是日耳曼帝国。
糟糕的是，英国脱欧者不明白这一点......
The thing is, if you ask people straight-up what they think about uniting all European countries in a supranational federation, a narrow majority (of those who express an opinion at all — most of the polls I’ve seen had easily 30–40% of “no comments”) will oppose it reflexively.
But on the other hand, if you ask them what they think about certain specific steps that bring us closer to such a federation like common European healthcare, more power to the EU Parliament or even a European army, the opposite is true: in most polls I’ve seen, a majority of responders with an opinion are in favor.
The conclusion drawn from this is that people are actually in favor of further federalization, as long as it happens step by step and not all at once. Which is how the EU is doing it. So there is no problem.
问题是，如果你直截了当地问人们对将所有欧洲国家团结在一个超国家的联邦中的看法，大多数人（在那些表达意见的人中--我所看到的大多数民意调查中都有30-40%的"没看法"）会反射性地反对它。
但另一方面，如果你问他们对某些使我们更接近这样一个联邦的具体步骤有什么看法，比如共同的欧洲医疗，给欧盟议会更多的权力，甚至是一支欧洲军队，情况恰恰相反：在我看到的大多数民意调查中，大多数有意见的答复者都是赞成的。
由此得出的结论是，人们实际上赞成进一步的联邦化，只要它是一步一步发生的，而不是一下子发生的。这就是欧盟的做法。所以没有问题。
September 18, 2020
“The conclusion drawn from this ”
Indeed, and also most of them are reacting like Pavlov’s dog to the ideas implanted in them by politicians.
When they are shown concrete ways, that do not contradict their reflex ideas, in an obvious way, they do not react.
IMHO, this does not show people are either pro or against Europe, this just shows, most of them, just do not think through those abstract ideas.
Make an experiment.
Boil hot water and throw shrimps in it, they will all jump out of the water.
Now take some room temperature water, put the shrimps in it, and boil it slowly.
Most of them will just slowly die by overheating.
This is exactly what they did in France with taxes.
25 years ago they created a tax called CSG, at 1%, nobody cared.
Nowadays, it has gone up to almost 18%!!
There is no doubt, nobody would have accepted that tax, straight at 18%.
"由此得出的结论"
的确，他们中的大多数人都像巴甫洛夫的狗一样，对政治家植入他们的想法做出反应。
当他们看到具体的方法，与他们的反射性想法不矛盾时，他们没有反应。
我认为，这并不表明人们是支持或反对欧洲的，这只是表明，他们中的大多数人，只是没有想清楚这些抽象的想法。
做个实验吧。
烧开热水，把虾子扔进去，它们都会跳出水面。
现在拿一些室温的水，把虾放在里面，慢慢地煮。
它们中的大多数就会因过热而慢慢死去。
这正是他们在法国对税收所做的事情。
25年前，他们创建了一个名为CSG的税种，税率为1%，没有人关心。
如今，它已经上升到了近18%！！。
毫无疑问，如果直接征收18%，没有人会接受这种税。
Man, I love this answer. I hope if the tide turns and the idea of Europe gains ground again, I'll be somewhere on the continent to benefit from it.
伙计，我喜欢这个答案。我希望如果潮流转向，欧洲统一的想法再次获得支持，我将在欧洲大陆的某个地方从中受益。
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
The British anti-EU side continue to make absurd claims.
The truth is the French will not stop being French, the Danes Danish, the Italians Italian, the Germans German etc etc.
Europe will continue to grow closer but that is nothing like becoming a single unitary state, no more than the UK allocating units of its armed forces to NATO or engaging with supra-national economic cooperation (previously the EU but seemingly now likely the WTO) makes it any less than the UK.
The idiotic brexit claims are largely for home consumption, sadly in the UK the population has suffered a 40yr+ history of being misled & lied to in the mass media in regard to how international trade works & especially what the EU does & how the EU works.
Successive British Govs have been complicit in this by seeking to blame the EU for their own domestic failings (& often direct domestic policies).
英国反欧盟的一方继续提出荒谬的主张。
事实是，法国人不会不再是法国人，丹麦人不会不再是丹麦人，意大利人不会不再是意大利人，德国人不会不再是德国人，等等。
欧洲将继续密切联系，但这与成为一个单一的统一国家毫无关系，就像英国将其武装部队分配给北约或参与超国家经济合作（以前是欧盟，但现在似乎可能是世贸组织）使其“没那么英国”了一样。
愚蠢的脱欧主张主要是为了国内消费，可悲的是，在英国，人们已经遭受了40多年在国际贸易如何运作，特别是欧盟做什么和欧盟如何运作方面被大众媒体误导和欺骗的历史。
历届英国政府在这方面都是同谋，试图把自己国内的失败归咎于欧盟（而且往往是直接的国内政策）。
No thanks I’m ok with the current situation
不，谢谢，我对于目前的情况很满意
, lives in Berlin
I can only talk about what is going on within the EU - and with this respect, I think with respect to European integration, most people had become pragmatic. The form of decision-making and coordination does not matter to most as long as coordination and preservation of their rights works. There, most people think that the EU should have competences where it is required, and do not care about whether the EU is a state or not.
The pandemic situation and other recent EU-wide discussions have shown that most people support the following:
People rather abhor internal border controls on the continent. Most people in the EU live quite near to a border, and many of them cross that border frequently. Those who do not, would be harassed by traffic jams caused by such border checks. One example: When Poland required a written declaration from every lorry (van) driver entering, traffic queued up for more than 120 km into Germany, affecting traffic around the Saxonian capital of Dresden. People living in Germany and working in Luxembourg were complaining about detours they had to make (because not all border crossings had enough space to perform controls there, and were closed for that reason), and waiting times. By establishing such controls, politicians do not gain popularity.
我只能谈谈欧盟内部发生的事情--在这方面，我认为在欧洲一体化方面，大多数人已经变得务实。只要在协调和维护他们的权利方面能够发挥作用，决策和协调的形式对大多数人来说并不重要。在那里，大多数人认为欧盟应该在需要的地方拥有权限，而不关心欧盟是否是一个国家。
大流行的情况和最近欧盟范围内的其他讨论表明，大多数人支持以下情况。
·人们相当憎恶欧洲大陆的内部边境控制。欧盟的大多数人都住在离边界相当近的地方，而且他们中的许多人经常跨越边界。那些不跨越边境的人，会被这种边境检查造成的交通拥堵所困扰。有一个例子。当波兰要求每个进入的卡车（货车）司机提供书面声明时，进入德国的交通排队超过120公里，影响了萨克森州首府德累斯顿附近的交通。住在德国和在卢森堡工作的人抱怨他们不得不绕道而行（因为不是所有的过境点都有足够的空间在那里进行控制，并因此而关闭），并抱怨等待时间。通过建立这样的控制，政治家们并没有获得人气。
People want to be able to travel to other EU states without being asked what they are doing there, and, of course, without being controlled. Most EU citizens travel to other EU states at least once a year, be it for holidays.
Mobile phone roaming within the EU also is an issue which is important to many people in the EU. By law, you may travel to, and use your mobile phone, in any EU country without having to pay extra charges. In former times, these charges had been exorbitant. Their abolition is very much appreciated (by the way, mobile phone plans did not get more expensive afterwards).
·外部边界控制和守卫也是一个无可争议的问题。如果你想对内开放边界，你需要外部边界保护。大多数人认为这是一个归属于欧盟的问题。
·人们希望能够到其他欧盟国家旅行而不被问及他们在那里做什么，当然也不被控制。大多数欧盟公民每年至少到其他欧盟国家旅行一次，无论是不是为了度假。
·欧盟内部的手机漫游也是一个对欧盟许多人来说很重要的问题。根据法律，你可以在任何欧盟国家旅行并使用你的手机，而不必支付额外的费用。在以前，这些费用是很高的。他们的废除非常值得赞赏（顺便说一下，之后的移动电话计划并没有变得更昂贵）。
Common high standards of goods - people want to buy from anywhere within the EU without having to care about standards, or even taxes or customs tariffs then. Many see the EU as a defense against lower world-market standards. “Chlorinated chicken” is a buzzword. “They will have to eat chlorinated chicken then, which the US will force them to import” is one of the main remarks people make on Britain after Brexit.
These are just some of the main current topics. Other important issues, like the common currency, are not really debated at the moment, but here, the support for integration is also very high and increasing.
·公路使用费是许多人希望在欧盟层面上解决的问题，但目前还远未得到协调。一些欧盟国家通过收费为其高速公路提供资金，而其他国家则通过税收。那些在国内为此纳税，然后又要在其他地方支付通行费的人，认为他们支付了双重费用。不同的成员国有不同的预算，这一概念并不能说服人们，因为他们自然而然地认为，对自己国家的税收支付必须给予他们类似欧盟范围内的道路使用权。由于普遍认为较富裕的欧盟北部国家为欧盟南部国家"买单"（这些国家更倾向于收取道路通行费），因此常见的反应是"我们付给他们的钱还不够多吗？"
·商品的共同高标准--人们希望从欧盟内部的任何地方购买，而不必关心标准，甚至税收或关税。许多人认为欧盟的标准是对较低的世界市场标准的一种防御。"氯化鸡"是一个流行语。"到时候他们不得不吃氯化鸡，美国会强迫他们进口"是人们对英国脱欧后的主要言论之一。
这些只是当前的一些主要话题。其他重要问题，如共同货币，目前还没有真正的讨论，但在这里，对一体化的支持率也非常高，而且还在增加。