Could Groups Like the European Union Ever Federalize?

[Hawki]

My short answer is "likely no," but I've recently been wondering about this.

So, in the real world, there's a number of multi-national organizations that operate within an organization, while remaining sovereign entities. Groups like the European Union, African Union, and Arab League come to mind. In fiction set in the future, it isn't uncommon for Earth to be under a sovereign government, but what's also present, at times, are superstates that have formed from real-world countries and become entities of their own. Wess'har has the Federal European Union. Star Trek has the United States of Africa. Halo has the United Republic of North America, and so on. This idea keeps coming up in speculative fiction, with Earth being more and more united. There's exceptions to this (e.g. Ender's Game is a setting where national identity remains very important, even after the world is united against the formics), but in my experience, they're the exceptions, not the rule.

So, thoughts? Again, I'd say no, I can't see countries willingly giving up their sovereignty, but even so, there is a precedent for this. Like, there's a reason why "Germany" exists as a country and not as independent states, or why there's a single United States born out of thirteen colonies. On the other hand, at least now, nationalism seems to be preventing such things - take Brexit for example. I'm not saying whether this is good or bad, I'm asking how likely these kinds of things are to occur.

 

[SckizoBoy]

They're united in fiction because it's generally easier to write that way. The writer doesn't need to go through the list of nations that they have and apply distinctive cultures/languages/political systems/societal quirks etc. to them individually if they can be smunched together. For those less lazy, it's a way of handwaving cultural evolution and an ideal to look forward to where we as a race trust our government to a small number of organisations (at least superficially).

Both Germany and the US formed out of a need to protect themselves from an external threat (both perceived and actual) and to provide themselves with international flex, not because its constituent representatives thought it'd be a good/necessary-for-the-people idea beforehand. The Thirteen Colonies would've happily stayed as the Thirteen Colonies if the British Crown & Government didn't act like a bag of dicks demanding tax at every turn, while Germany had France, Austria and Russia as neighbours and Prussia wanted to sit at the big boys' table, hence Zollverein first, NGC second and Empire to end with. Given the shitshow that Bismarck (albeit indirectly) caused, I'm surprised the French didn't advocate for the dissolution of the German state as a whole instead of just the Empire. No way of weakening Germany like turning Prussia and only Prussia into a republic while letting the minor states keep their monarchies/restoring their governments/governmental powers, then watch central Europe descend into anarchy.

 

[JoJo]

While as you say, there is precedent for unions forming in the past, if you look at the past century then the reverse has been true. Colonial empires have fallen and led to dozens of new sovereign nations. The Soviet Union and Yugoslavia broke up. On the other hand, the few sovereign unions have been attempted were spectacular failures (United Arab Republic, anyone?).

If anything, the trend seems to be towards smaller but also more interconnected nations. Personally, I believe we'll see more organisations like the European Union and the Union of South American Nations in the future, but ultimately the states within them will retain sovereignty.