A European Union with respect for cultures.

[Wodan]

I support the idea to devide the European Union in a Germanic, a Romanic and a Slavic part. This would underline the differences between these groups and strengthen the solidarity between Germanics, Romanics and Slavics mutual. The present EU is a threat for the cultural differences. What do you think about this?

[melitikus]

Unita fid-diversita

[Dakkus]

I don't really think that would be a very good idea, because there is a lot of diversity even among the different Slavic countries. Or Germanian. Or Romanic.

The problem would be that it would kill the cultural diversity between the different countries inside the groups. You can't say a Polish farmer and a Slovenian fisher would have too much in common..
You would end up having three cultures in EU: euro-panslavistic, pangermanian (uh-oh), and panromanian (hasn't that been quite passé for the last 2000 years?).
Currently there are 25 cultures, which each have slight problems with keeping theirselves from melting into one. But it sure is better than having 25 cultures that have severe problems with keeping theirselves melting into three.
That is, because similar cultures melt into one lump much faster than different ones.

And what would you do with Finland, Estonia, Hungary, Malta, Latvia, Lithuania, Cyprus and Greece, which don't fall into any of your categories?
The Slavic countries have altogether some 60 million people, the Germanic countries 180 million and the Romanic ones 100 million.
How on Earth could such tiny countries such as Finland or Greece stay alive among those giants?
Imagine an EU that would practically have the following countries:
Slavonia: 60 million people, Germania: 180 million people, Rome: 100 million people, Finland: 5 million people, Estonia: 1 million people, Hungary: 10 million people, Malta: 0 million people, Latvia: 2 million people, Lithuania: 3,5 million people, Cyprus: 1 million people, Greece: 11 million people. See the contrast?
Of the last ones, only Greece and Hungary would have any chances of being able to get their voice heard among the megagiants.

Also the idea that cultures are under a threat in EU or even /because/ of EU is quite questionable. Cultures have been changing always. I can't believe the European cultures could ever melt into one, since the respect for cultural diversity is so great. They may come closer to each other, but that would usually mean cultures borrowing berst parts from each others and using them among their old cultures.
Of course some cultural aspects would disappear, but that would happen only in cases where the people of the disappearing culture would find its culture bad. And in that case those cultural aspects would die off anyway, because if they consider theirselves bad, they will seek for new ways of doing things. Either from other cultures or by inventing their own new way.
Currently Finland has several different traditional cultures, although it has been very much one nation for over 500 years. The people at the western coast still like weird fights and are very silent, while in the east people are far more talkative. Also the talking style is very different and the Swedish speaking areas in Finland have managed to keep Swedish speaking, although their relative size has been quite small.

[melitikus]

in my opinion its true that the EU has like 25 different cultures however these cultures overlap with each other at some point, hence all the europeans share some common cultural parts - however if Turkey joins the EU, culturally it would be too different from the rest of Europe

[Dakkus]

in my opinion its true that the EU has like 25 different cultures however these cultures overlap with each other at some point, hence all the europeans share some common cultural parts - however if Turkey joins the EU, culturally it would be too different from the rest of Europe

What the curling? How does this relate to anything?

[ART]

I support the idea to devide the European Union in a Germanic, a Romanic and a Slavic part. This would underline the differences between these groups and strengthen the solidarity between Germanics, Romanics and Slavics mutual. The present EU is a threat for the cultural differences. What do you think about this?

Simply absourd: there aren't really political, cultural and economic motivations for this.

[Totengräber]

I think that could produce rassism. So I´m against that...

[Wodan]

I think that could produce rassism. So I´m against that...

[Wodan]

And what would you do with Finland, Estonia, Hungary, Malta, Latvia, Lithuania, Cyprus and Greece, which don't fall into any of your categories?

Those countries could form another group or join a group. Finland could join the Germanic group if they want: it's a northern European country with a Swedish speaking minority, Malta could join the Romanic group because it's a mediterranean island or the Germanic group because English is an official language there and Hungary could join the slavic group (if they want that offcourse). There is a solution for every country.

[Dakkus]

And what would you do with Finland, Estonia, Hungary, Malta, Latvia, Lithuania, Cyprus and Greece, which don't fall into any of your categories?

Those countries could form another group or join a group. Finland could join the Germanic group if they want: it's a northern European country with a Swedish speaking minority, Malta could join the Romanic group because it's a mediterranean island or the Germanic group because English is an official language there and Hungary could join the slavic group (if they want that offcourse). There is a solution for every country.

The Swedish speaking minority is so small (6%) that by the same logic you should join Germany and Turkey into the same group. There is a Turkish minority in Germany, after all ;)

I think the Finns might feel a bit like outsiders in the Germanic group, because the language would be more different for Finns than for other people.
Finland does share some cultural roots with Austria, but then again we do share cultural roots also with Latvia and Hungary. There is always a reason to put any country in any group. That's because the countries in EU are already quite uniform. In one aspect Finns are like Germans, in another one like Hungarians. The third aspect might make us look like Italians, the fourth one like the Irish. In the current form of EU we are at the same time in all groups. In some groups we are more than in the others, but we are of course all everywhere. I figure that's quite a good thing.
Malta might fit culturally in a Mediterranean group, but your idea was about languages, not cultures.
I think Hungarians would be very annoyed if they saw you thinking they should join the slavic group. There isn't more slavic in Hungary than there is in Germany. And of course the Hungarians would feel a bit like outsiders, no matter which of the other groups they joined.

And those countries might not work very well just together, because even all of them together are still very small and because the group would be culturally and linguistically too diverse, to be in any manner comparable to the other groups.

So, either there would be "outsider countries" which would quietly die off or get annihilated or there would be the "weird block" that would lose to the other, more uniform, groups in pretty much every aspect.

[Wodan]

My idea was not only about language but also about culture. Thats why the topic title is: A European Union with respect for cultures.

[tabbs]

The suggestion is still strange in my opinion. Do the Germans, for example, have so much more in common with the Flemish that with the Walloons?

The European Union may have become too big too quickly. But simply and somewhat arbitrarily dividing it into three blocks is not a viable solution in my opinion. Maybe there will be more cases in the future where some member states "opt out" while others proceed. But that is not an issue of "Germanic" or "Romanic" etc. countries ...

Christian

[groentje]

Another thought. At a certain point, we are all European. And all a citizen of a member state, sometimes belonging to a subgroup, etc. Together with language, culture, history (not always the same as culture), religion, hobbies, etc. citizenship is the maker of our identity.
Focussing on culture/language/citizenship leaves IMHO so many things unnoticed, it's not viable.

The EU is far from perfect, yes, but neither are nations and states.

[Ning]

How do you do for countries that belong to several parts such as France (Germanic in the eastern part, Romanic in the southern part) ?

[groentje]

As a "proper Belgian", I know the feeling. It's even stronger here, because we have 3 official languages, French, Dutch and even German.
But even within a country, within a region using the same language (and even a similar dialect), differences can be very big. Think about North and South Italy. OK, the main reason may be money and poverty, but it's not all. Montenegrins speak the same language as Serbians, but didn't share each others history. A Parisien and someone from Montreuil-le-Henri will probably not share each others views on many things.
Perhaps, language unites. But if it's the only thing, it wil probably not be enough. History won't be enough, either. And culture is just to abstract to put your finger upon. Either way, the difference between citylife and countrylife will probably be bigger.
If you look at it, you can't understand why people share a common identity, a common nationality, but they do. But as it's a human thing, nothing is sure for ever. Not even nationalities.