歐洲人想要一個(gè)“歐洲合眾國”嗎？你想要嗎？歐洲國家成為合眾國的機(jī)會(huì)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?
譯文簡介
謝邀。這實(shí)際上是三個(gè)獨(dú)立的問題。
正文翻譯
Do Europeans want United States of Europe? Do you want United States of Europe? What are the chances for United States of Europe?
歐洲人想要一個(gè)“歐洲合眾國”嗎？你想要嗎？歐洲國家成為合眾國的機(jī)會(huì)是多少？
評(píng)論翻譯
很贊 ( 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.
謝邀。這實(shí)際上是三個(gè)獨(dú)立的問題。
1.歐洲人想要一個(gè)歐洲合眾國嗎？
a. 歐洲的人口約為7.4億。在這樣一個(gè)龐大的數(shù)字中，不會(huì)有一個(gè)單一的意見被他們每個(gè)人所認(rèn)同。還有并非所有的歐洲國家都是歐盟的成員。
b. 歐盟成員國的總?cè)丝诮咏?.5億。同樣的答案也適用。在如此眾多的人口中，沒有一種意見是所有人都認(rèn)同的。
如果把問題改成"一些歐洲人是否想要?dú)W洲合眾國"，很可能只有少數(shù)人希望如此。
2. 你想要一個(gè)歐洲合眾國嗎？
不，我不想要！
3. 建立歐洲合眾國的可能性有多大？
非常渺茫，甚至不存在。超過20個(gè)歐洲國家甚至不屬于歐盟。他們不太可能對(duì)與其他48個(gè)歐洲委員會(huì)成員的國家建立某種形式的政治聯(lián)盟感興趣。
目前，歐盟不可能轉(zhuǎn)變?yōu)槠?7個(gè)成員國的政治聯(lián)盟。條約中沒有這方面的規(guī)定。當(dāng)然，總是有可能達(dá)成新的條約。然而，讓所有現(xiàn)有的成員國都加入任何一個(gè)政治聯(lián)盟的新組織是非常不可能的。
“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.
現(xiàn)有的條約包含以下文字。
"本條約標(biāo)志著在歐洲各國人民之間建立一個(gè)越來越緊密的聯(lián)盟的過程中進(jìn)入了一個(gè)新的階段，在這個(gè)過程中，決策盡可能公開，盡可能貼近公民。"
"越來越緊密的聯(lián)合"這句話經(jīng)常被那些想誤導(dǎo)他人認(rèn)為建立一個(gè)政治上統(tǒng)一的超級(jí)國家是現(xiàn)有條約的一個(gè)目標(biāo)的欺騙者所引用--脫離其背景。然而這樣的條約與在一個(gè)中央集權(quán)的超級(jí)國家內(nèi)盡可能公開地、盡可能貼近公民地作出決定是完全不相容的。
在二戰(zhàn)結(jié)束后，歐洲各國人民之間更緊密的聯(lián)合是可取的，當(dāng)時(shí)各國人民都是敵對(duì)的，數(shù)百萬人喪生。歐洲各國人民之間更緊密的聯(lián)合的目的是為了彌合戰(zhàn)爭造成的痛苦和惡感。
戰(zhàn)爭結(jié)束75年后，歐洲聯(lián)盟在治愈創(chuàng)傷方面取得了巨大的成功。法國和德國現(xiàn)在的合作方式在1945年時(shí)是無法想象的。
謝謝你的提問。
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.
一個(gè)歐洲合眾國不需要包括所有的歐洲人（很可能只是歐盟的國家）。畢竟，并不是所有的美洲國家，甚至只是北美--都包含在美國。
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.
由于歐盟成員國不可能形成一個(gè)歐洲合眾國，所以也不可能出現(xiàn)你所說的組織。對(duì)于歐盟27國中的許多國家來說，統(tǒng)一或聯(lián)邦制國家是一種生理厭惡。因?yàn)樗枰惶仔碌臈l約，所以這些國家都不會(huì)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。
布魯塞爾當(dāng)然有這樣的愿望，而且我認(rèn)為歐洲其他地區(qū)的政治領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人也認(rèn)為，在一個(gè)日益全球化的世界里，團(tuán)結(jié)起來對(duì)抗美國、俄羅斯、中國和其他正在崛起的威脅是明智的。
幾年前關(guān)于歐盟憲法的公投表明，即使在基本上支持歐盟的國家中，也有對(duì)這種步驟的渴望。
而且，歐盟確實(shí)在不斷擴(kuò)大其授權(quán)，所以它的法院正在對(duì)更廣泛的主題進(jìn)行裁決，如同性戀婚姻，它正越來越多地參與到國家安全、國防、警務(wù)和外交政策中。議會(huì)越來越多地推動(dòng)權(quán)力，并逐漸擴(kuò)大其任務(wù)，委員會(huì)已經(jīng)變得不再是一個(gè)中立的公務(wù)員制度，而是更加政治化（在容克的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)下尤其如此），所以前進(jìn)的方向肯定是走向聯(lián)邦國家。歐盟當(dāng)然會(huì)投入大量資金，使歐盟的人們首先感到自己是歐洲人，其次才是他們的國籍。
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.
比利時(shí)前首相居伊·費(fèi)爾霍夫施塔特和多年來議會(huì)中ALDE集團(tuán)的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人是這個(gè)愿景的積極倡導(dǎo)者。
現(xiàn)在有步驟將預(yù)算政策結(jié)合起來，因?yàn)?008年的危機(jī)表明，沒有經(jīng)濟(jì)和財(cái)政聯(lián)合的貨幣聯(lián)盟在危機(jī)中是行不通的。需要進(jìn)行財(cái)富轉(zhuǎn)移，就像在主權(quán)國家中，在貨幣聯(lián)盟的贏家（即德國）和那些在該工具被取消后失去的國家（如意大利、西班牙和希臘）之間進(jìn)行財(cái)富轉(zhuǎn)移。就像美國聯(lián)邦政府將財(cái)富從紐約和加利福尼亞轉(zhuǎn)移到俄亥俄、密歇根和印第安納一樣。
因此，作為比較，歐盟正處于與美國在《聯(lián)邦條款》時(shí)期相同的發(fā)展階段。
印度也是一個(gè)很好的比較對(duì)象，它將許多非常不同的文化、歷史和語言匯集成一個(gè)聯(lián)邦國家。
, 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.
問：歐洲人想要?dú)W洲合眾國嗎？
答：不。大多數(shù)歐洲人都很喜歡民族國家。
我們需要多層次的政府：地方、區(qū)域和國家。 我們還需要超國家的組織來協(xié)調(diào)環(huán)境保護(hù)和危機(jī)應(yīng)對(duì)，解決貿(mào)易爭端等。這些組織大多是非政府組織。
你的問題是，比起國家主權(quán)和歐盟合作，歐洲人是否更喜歡封閉的聯(lián)邦*，比如俄羅斯或美國的聯(lián)邦？
不，他們不喜歡。他們現(xiàn)在的情況和他們所擁有的條約做得相當(dāng)好。 然而，在未來會(huì)有更多的協(xié)議，轉(zhuǎn)化為越來越多的歐洲一體化。
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.
問：歐洲合眾國的機(jī)會(huì)有多大？
答：在可預(yù)見的未來，機(jī)會(huì)渺茫。 沒有歐盟成員的一致決定，這種發(fā)展是不可能實(shí)現(xiàn)的。
我的國家不支持。我們有一個(gè)否決權(quán)。所以...
除非情況發(fā)生了巨大變化，否則不會(huì)發(fā)生。那種將在很長一段時(shí)間內(nèi)發(fā)生的變化。
也許所謂的世界秩序的轉(zhuǎn)變，會(huì)迫使歐盟站出來。如果是在我們和別人之間，我寧愿是我們。不打算撒謊。我只是不認(rèn)為這在目前來說是一個(gè)急切的問題。
作為一個(gè)成員，你確實(shí)需要警惕的是保護(hù)你參與決策的能力。不要失去那個(gè)永遠(yuǎn)都非常重要的發(fā)言權(quán)。 這意味著在歐盟議會(huì)選舉中投票，并普遍選舉那些受過歐盟運(yùn)作教育的代表。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://nxnpts.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
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.
問：你想要?dú)W洲合眾國嗎？
答：我不想要。 如果目標(biāo)是歐洲合眾國，我不支持歐盟的聯(lián)邦化。
我支持"在歐洲各國人民之間建立一個(gè)越來越緊密的聯(lián)盟的過程，在這個(gè)過程中，決策盡可能公開，盡可能貼近公民"。
我贊成促進(jìn)"......生活在開放和民主社會(huì)的人民之間的信任和理解......"。
這些并不只是說說而已。民主價(jià)值和透明度對(duì)我來說意義重大。
就權(quán)力政治而言，我的祖國芬蘭是鯊魚池中的一條小魚。我并不希望它成為一條鯊魚。我不喜歡它們：
侵略、壓迫、入侵、擴(kuò)張。
歐洲聯(lián)盟，在我看來，是一群魚在一起協(xié)調(diào)地游泳。有時(shí)比較松散，不太協(xié)調(diào)。其他時(shí)候，則更緊密地結(jié)合在一起。 總是處于變化的狀態(tài)，其基本目的保持不變。
你看，使魚群聚在一起的紐帶是協(xié)議。
這就是歐盟的情況：一堆的協(xié)議。
我不知道為什么恢復(fù)過去的治理模式會(huì)是一種理想。 我認(rèn)為我們需要比這更多的創(chuàng)新。
*一些歐盟國家本身就是聯(lián)盟，但這個(gè)話題是超國家層面的治理。
, 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…
歐洲人想要?dú)W洲合眾國嗎？
我沒有最近的數(shù)據(jù)，但在我看來，民粹主義的宣傳已經(jīng)發(fā)揮了作用，支持更明顯的聯(lián)盟的人目前是少數(shù)。
你想要?dú)W洲合眾國嗎？
說實(shí)話，我不知道歐洲合眾國會(huì)是什么樣子。如果它像美國一樣，各州有很大的自治權(quán)，這都已經(jīng)很難實(shí)現(xiàn)了。另一方面，在一個(gè)超級(jí)大國越來越多地對(duì)最弱小的國家指手畫腳的世界里，我可以看到這樣一個(gè)聯(lián)盟的意義。早在1951年的《巴黎條約》中，歐盟的創(chuàng)始人就已經(jīng)很清楚這一點(diǎn)。
歐洲合眾國的機(jī)會(huì)有多大？
自1914年以來，歐洲一直沒有停止過失地，現(xiàn)在是扭轉(zhuǎn)歷史方向的時(shí)候了。我們的英國朋友告訴我們，我們很快就會(huì)成為第四帝國的一部分，我回應(yīng)他們說，我準(zhǔn)備只說德語，如果這是讓我的女兒和她的后代能夠享受我們自1945年以來的和平要付出的代價(jià)。這個(gè)立場可能會(huì)使我被當(dāng)“某奸”，但在半個(gè)世紀(jì)后，這將被認(rèn)為是相當(dāng)明智的?？傊?，我不在乎，反正到時(shí)候我已經(jīng)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…
"我們的英國朋友告訴我們，我們很快將成為第四帝國的一部分"
目前的德國不是第四帝國，只要他們只有經(jīng)濟(jì)實(shí)力，而法國也有軍事力量。
如果這種平衡效果很好，那可能就很好。
另外，我們?cè)诜▏颊f英語，而不是德語。
我們可能會(huì)生活在英聯(lián)邦，而不是日耳曼帝國。
糟糕的是，英國脫歐者不明白這一點(diǎn)......
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.
問題是，如果你直截了當(dāng)?shù)貑柸藗儗?duì)將所有歐洲國家團(tuán)結(jié)在一個(gè)超國家的聯(lián)邦中的看法，大多數(shù)人（在那些表達(dá)意見的人中--我所看到的大多數(shù)民意調(diào)查中都有30-40%的"沒看法"）會(huì)反射性地反對(duì)它。
但另一方面，如果你問他們對(duì)某些使我們更接近這樣一個(gè)聯(lián)邦的具體步驟有什么看法，比如共同的歐洲醫(yī)療，給歐盟議會(huì)更多的權(quán)力，甚至是一支歐洲軍隊(duì)，情況恰恰相反：在我看到的大多數(shù)民意調(diào)查中，大多數(shù)有意見的答復(fù)者都是贊成的。
由此得出的結(jié)論是，人們實(shí)際上贊成進(jìn)一步的聯(lián)邦化，只要它是一步一步發(fā)生的，而不是一下子發(fā)生的。這就是歐盟的做法。所以沒有問題。
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%.
"由此得出的結(jié)論"
的確，他們中的大多數(shù)人都像巴甫洛夫的狗一樣，對(duì)政治家植入他們的想法做出反應(yīng)。
當(dāng)他們看到具體的方法，與他們的反射性想法不矛盾時(shí)，他們沒有反應(yīng)。
我認(rèn)為，這并不表明人們是支持或反對(duì)歐洲的，這只是表明，他們中的大多數(shù)人，只是沒有想清楚這些抽象的想法。
做個(gè)實(shí)驗(yàn)吧。
燒開熱水，把蝦子扔進(jìn)去，它們都會(huì)跳出水面。
現(xiàn)在拿一些室溫的水，把蝦放在里面，慢慢地煮。
它們中的大多數(shù)就會(huì)因過熱而慢慢死去。
這正是他們?cè)诜▏鴮?duì)稅收所做的事情。
25年前，他們創(chuàng)建了一個(gè)名為CSG的稅種，稅率為1%，沒有人關(guān)心。
如今，它已經(jīng)上升到了近18%！！。
毫無疑問，如果直接征收18%，沒有人會(huì)接受這種稅。
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.
伙計(jì)，我喜歡這個(gè)答案。我希望如果潮流轉(zhuǎn)向，歐洲統(tǒng)一的想法再次獲得支持，我將在歐洲大陸的某個(gè)地方從中受益。
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).
英國反歐盟的一方繼續(xù)提出荒謬的主張。
事實(shí)是，法國人不會(huì)不再是法國人，丹麥人不會(huì)不再是丹麥人，意大利人不會(huì)不再是意大利人，德國人不會(huì)不再是德國人，等等。
歐洲將繼續(xù)密切聯(lián)系，但這與成為一個(gè)單一的統(tǒng)一國家毫無關(guān)系，就像英國將其武裝部隊(duì)分配給北約或參與超國家經(jīng)濟(jì)合作（以前是歐盟，但現(xiàn)在似乎可能是世貿(mào)組織）使其“沒那么英國”了一樣。
愚蠢的脫歐主張主要是為了國內(nèi)消費(fèi)，可悲的是，在英國，人們已經(jīng)遭受了40多年在國際貿(mào)易如何運(yùn)作，特別是歐盟做什么和歐盟如何運(yùn)作方面被大眾媒體誤導(dǎo)和欺騙的歷史。
歷屆英國政府在這方面都是同謀，試圖把自己國內(nèi)的失敗歸咎于歐盟（而且往往是直接的國內(nèi)政策）。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://nxnpts.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
No thanks I’m ok with the current situation
不，謝謝，我對(duì)于目前的情況很滿意
, 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.
我只能談?wù)剼W盟內(nèi)部發(fā)生的事情--在這方面，我認(rèn)為在歐洲一體化方面，大多數(shù)人已經(jīng)變得務(wù)實(shí)。只要在協(xié)調(diào)和維護(hù)他們的權(quán)利方面能夠發(fā)揮作用，決策和協(xié)調(diào)的形式對(duì)大多數(shù)人來說并不重要。在那里，大多數(shù)人認(rèn)為歐盟應(yīng)該在需要的地方擁有權(quán)限，而不關(guān)心歐盟是否是一個(gè)國家。
大流行的情況和最近歐盟范圍內(nèi)的其他討論表明，大多數(shù)人支持以下情況。
·人們相當(dāng)憎惡歐洲大陸的內(nèi)部邊境控制。歐盟的大多數(shù)人都住在離邊界相當(dāng)近的地方，而且他們中的許多人經(jīng)?？缭竭吔?。那些不跨越邊境的人，會(huì)被這種邊境檢查造成的交通擁堵所困擾。有一個(gè)例子。當(dāng)波蘭要求每個(gè)進(jìn)入的卡車（貨車）司機(jī)提供書面聲明時(shí)，進(jìn)入德國的交通排隊(duì)超過120公里，影響了薩克森州首府德累斯頓附近的交通。住在德國和在盧森堡工作的人抱怨他們不得不繞道而行（因?yàn)椴皇撬械倪^境點(diǎn)都有足夠的空間在那里進(jìn)行控制，并因此而關(guān)閉），并抱怨等待時(shí)間。通過建立這樣的控制，政治家們并沒有獲得人氣。
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).
·外部邊界控制和守衛(wèi)也是一個(gè)無可爭議的問題。如果你想對(duì)內(nèi)開放邊界，你需要外部邊界保護(hù)。大多數(shù)人認(rèn)為這是一個(gè)歸屬于歐盟的問題。
·人們希望能夠到其他歐盟國家旅行而不被問及他們?cè)谀抢镒鍪裁?，?dāng)然也不被控制。大多數(shù)歐盟公民每年至少到其他歐盟國家旅行一次，無論是不是為了度假。
·歐盟內(nèi)部的手機(jī)漫游也是一個(gè)對(duì)歐盟許多人來說很重要的問題。根據(jù)法律，你可以在任何歐盟國家旅行并使用你的手機(jī)，而不必支付額外的費(fèi)用。在以前，這些費(fèi)用是很高的。他們的廢除非常值得贊賞（順便說一下，之后的移動(dòng)電話計(jì)劃并沒有變得更昂貴）。
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.
·公路使用費(fèi)是許多人希望在歐盟層面上解決的問題，但目前還遠(yuǎn)未得到協(xié)調(diào)。一些歐盟國家通過收費(fèi)為其高速公路提供資金，而其他國家則通過稅收。那些在國內(nèi)為此納稅，然后又要在其他地方支付通行費(fèi)的人，認(rèn)為他們支付了雙重費(fèi)用。不同的成員國有不同的預(yù)算，這一概念并不能說服人們，因?yàn)樗麄冏匀欢坏卣J(rèn)為，對(duì)自己國家的稅收支付必須給予他們類似歐盟范圍內(nèi)的道路使用權(quán)。由于普遍認(rèn)為較富裕的歐盟北部國家為歐盟南部國家"買單"（這些國家更傾向于收取道路通行費(fèi)），因此常見的反應(yīng)是"我們付給他們的錢還不夠多嗎？"
·商品的共同高標(biāo)準(zhǔn)--人們希望從歐盟內(nèi)部的任何地方購買，而不必關(guān)心標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，甚至稅收或關(guān)稅。許多人認(rèn)為歐盟的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)是對(duì)較低的世界市場標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的一種防御。"氯化雞"是一個(gè)流行語。"到時(shí)候他們不得不吃氯化雞，美國會(huì)強(qiáng)迫他們進(jìn)口"是人們對(duì)英國脫歐后的主要言論之一。
這些只是當(dāng)前的一些主要話題。其他重要問題，如共同貨幣，目前還沒有真正的討論，但在這里，對(duì)一體化的支持率也非常高，而且還在增加。