Laszlo Bruszt and David Stark urge us to take a look at the United States in the 1780s, which displayed similar challenges that the European Union is facing today - a political and economic disarray. They point out that the first words of the US Constitution - “We the People of the United States,” rang hollow, because "few in the country had a strong American identity". Most of the country’s citizens had "lived their lives within a 30-mile radius of where they were born"; so their "political attachments" were quite parochial.

It's true that it took "the creation of a national government" in America to unite the country and its people. Indeed, under the 1781 Articles of Confederation, the 13 former British colonies had "created a common market, with common institutions, including a central bank". But the authors had forgotten to mention that they shared a common language too - English.

Language has always been a contentious issue, which is tied to questions of culture and identity. While there are 24 official languages in the EU, some 40% of Europeans are said to speak English as a foreign language, and 13% have it as a mother tongue. Some even suggest that English should be made the official language of the EU, so that everybody learns it next to their native tongue. Perhaps this would help boost Europe’s economy and sense of unity. This suggestion will fall on deaf ears among nationalists and chauvinists.

It's true what Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, James Madison, and George Washington said about local politics, which only "rewarded parochialism and provincialism at the expense of the “national interest” – the shared interests of the union’s member states". This is equally true within the EU, because national leaders don't see themselves as "European politicians", as long as they hold themselves accountable to their domestic voters. Unfortunately many disgruntled voters feel misrepresented by mainstream political parties and leaders. This drives them into the arms of fringe parties, which only have a very narrow range of policy options like bespoke catering service. If consensus is difficult to reach on national level due to a fragmented political landscape, it will even be harder for EU leaders to agree unanimously.

Even if the drafters of the US Constitution "proposed the creation of a national government accountable to the people of the US", the idea of "shared sovereignty – the system of federalism that allows for multiple levels of government and for local, state, regional, and national loyalties to coincide, rather than compete" may not work within the EU, because realpolitik and national interests still dominate the policies of each member state.

The authors maintain we Europeans should learn from the US, because "the situation on the continent is no worse than that of the US in the 1780s". It is a question of taking "bold political action" to change the "EUs political structure" and help midwife a "new and stable union". But for the time being it remains a wishful thinking!