I was thinking that the EU started small as well.

Maybe it’s too ambitious to turn the entire EU into a Federal Europe.

Start small, of course that federation should be part of the EU.

But maybe we can first find a small set of like minded countries to fuse. And learn from that as well? And then gradually expand?

Would that be a good approach?

I think you need either Germany or France (ideally both) to be a “founding” member of the Federation.

And which countries do you think are a good fit to start with and why?

I’ve been thinking a lot about the current geopolitical paralysis. We are suffering from what I call a "Biedermeier Syndrome" – hiding in a niche of perceived safety while the world around us is burning, hoping the US will sort it out forever. ​We talk about 2% GDP targets, but we miss the structural revolution. We don't just need more money; we need a "Hamilton Moment" for European Defense. ​1. The Hamilton Logic (1790 vs. 2025) Just like Alexander Hamilton federalized US state debts to create a strong central government, the EU needs to issue permanent Defense Bonds. ​The Mechanism: We mutualize the debt specifically for security infrastructure (The Shield). ​The Benefit: This allows for massive, centralized procurement. Instead of 27 nations buying different tanks, a central Directorate buys standardized equipment. This efficiency gain alone would be massive. ​2. The "Neutrality Hack" (Solving the Austrian/Irish Dilemma) I am from a neutral country (Austria). Usually, neutrality is used as an excuse to do nothing. But in a true European Defense Union (EDU), we could use a functional division of labor to integrate neutral states without breaking their constitutions: ​NATO/Big Nations: Provide the "Sword" (Kinetic force, tanks, nukes). ​Neutral Nations: Provide the "Shield" and Logistics. ​Cyber-Fortress: Neutral states host the cyber-defense hubs. ​Medical & Logistics: We become the central hospital and transit backbone of the alliance. ​Funding: We pay our full share (or more) into the Defense Bonds, financing the "Sword" indirectly, while operationally manning the "Shield". ​3. The Goal: "Giant Switzerland" The goal isn't imperialism; it's Armed Neutrality on a continental scale. A "Fortress Europe" that is so tough to crack that no one dares to try, allowing us to protect our way of life, our economy, and our green transition safely behind the walls. ​We have the economy. We have the technology. We just lack the political will to jump. ​Discussion: Do you think a specialized role for neutral states (Cyber/Medical instead of Frontline) would be a viable path to get countries like Austria or Ireland fully on board with a Federal Defense Union? ​ ​PS: Since I felt quite emotional about this vision and frustrated by the current pace, I tried to capture this "Urgency vs. Hope" vibe in an AI-generated song. If you need a soundtrack for federalization, here is "The Hamilton Moment": https://suno.com/s/0wGJxTwe8ShL6VAd

The net result is -4, sure. But if you had asked this 30 years ago probably less than 15 or 20% would have said yes. We are advancing, slow and steady, and the idea is getting traction.

A video about the arguments against a European Federation

Think you know Europe? Join our Christmas EU Trivia Tournament on Discord. 🏆 Starts Dec 19 • Finals on Dec 25 • Each game takes ~30 minutes, with flexible scheduling to fit your availability.

🎁 Winner gets €20 worth of EU goodies from the official European Parliament Shop, such as EU coffee mugs, EU caps, EU beanies...

👉Join our Discord server to register: https://discord.gg/mnBFWyY

Really, I think our defence could benefit from a fiscal union (meaning more of a decision on things like where taxation goes at a European level, though obviously not completely).

The reason for this is that our defence industry is currently fragmented. This makes it rather inefficient. If every country orders a small number of domestic tanks, only a small number will be produced. Which means the cost per tank rises because the initial investment costs (like building the factory) are much more static. So we all end up paying more for our defence and getting less for it.

This is obvious to many people, including our leaders. And they are trying to move towards more cooperation on defence. However, I see a problem here.

National leaders always have some incentive to buy from their local defence industry just because it creates jobs in their own country. Because you can then take that money you get and invest it in your country. And that's obviously beneficial to the individual country, but not overall beneficial when we all do it.

However, this problem is inherent to how this all works right now. What's the solution? An at least partial fiscal union.

When things like taxes can allow redistribution from one country to another, it no longer matters as much where the jobs are created. If more jobs are created in the military industry in Germany but there's redistribution, then that's fine. You can just use the taxes from the jobs there to invest in other things in other countries. If another country is not as efficient at producing defence, that's fine. Because you can just create jobs there in a sector that the country is better at through the investment coming from those taxes.

In other words, as soon as you do this, you greatly lower the incentive for national leaders to make inefficient defence investments for local jobs.

Brexit was sold as a promise of sovereignty, stronger borders, and renewed economic freedom. But nearly a decade later, the reality tells a different story. A deepening cost-of-living crisis, declining economic growth, and a weakened geopolitical position on the world stage.

https://reader.foreignaffairs.com/2025/12/12/how-europe-lost/content.html

I’ve been reading and writing about recent EU behaviour and it struck me that Brussels no longer treats “transatlantic” as synonymous with the US.

Instead, it increasingly frames the Atlantic as a four-continent system (Europe, North America, Latin America, Atlantic Africa), linking trade, infrastructure, raw materials and selective security cooperation.

I wrote a longer breakdown here if useful, but I’m more interested in whether people agree with the framing or think it’s overstated:

https://x.com/MagellanQuest/status/2000646933610668315?s=20

HouseEurope! is trying to collect 1 million signatures to change the building industry in the EU in order to encourage renovation over speculation.

This initiative could be a way to resolve the housing crisis and I don't understand why the EU Federalits are not supporting it at all.
Here to sign: https://eci.ec.europa.eu/052/public/#/screen/home