Optimistic. Reminds me of how confident the Brexiteers were concerning how "easy" they would leave the EU.
EU countries really want to inconvenience millions of their own citizens while also damaging their economies over a non-controversial issue with a simple solution that requires no negotiation, they have long acknowledged is a priority and that they have already agreed to.
I think most of these are based on assumptions. I see no reason why a united europe would for example mean the loss of individual cultures or diversity.
It's not an 'assumption' to note that a USoE vastly increases the scale and complexity of governance. Nor that it reduces diversity in decision making. Nor that reduction of diversity makes systems fragile as the scale of errors is magnified and 'firebreaks' are removed. Nor that lack of Europe wide public sphere means lack of democratic accountability with different countries living in significantly different political realities. Nor that centralising power incentivises lobbyists/special interest groups to influence legislation, etc.
As for democratic set-up, that's a question of set-up. I agree it's too abstract today and still too much of a political construct.
It's not just a case of 'set up', it is the fact that there inherently undemocratic consequences of a USoE.
Lack of public sphere. Distance of government from people. Lack of influence of small countries. Diversity of countries/economies makes fair legislation difficult.
Agree with all of this. Loss of individuality and cultures is a total red herring
Even within the UK there are rivalries between towns Manchester/Liverpool; Newcastle/Sunderland; Glasgow/Edinburgh are prime examples; identity has not been lost.
A functioning democracy requires the existence of commonalities reinforced by a common public sphere, education, cultural identity, etc.
This doesn't lead to the disappearance of cultures, just the gradual erosion. Also the places you mention have very similar cultures, just local pride (the same thing that leads to national pride which creates problems for USoE).
This is why decentralised localism is better than abstract internationalism. Local identities are far more inclusive, and their diversity acts as a bulwark against nationalism, not an accelerant of it