No crystal ball, but imho Europeans need to get their democracies back in working order. For one, that would put an end to pinning all the blame on the "American Empire". If this is an empire, it is the least self serving the world has even seen.
As for the US Civil War. I agree that sovereignity was a component, but only because they wanted to exercise the right of a slave-based economy. It's always about the money. The issue in Europe is all about the money too. NAFTA had similar motivations. I think instead of 'free market' and 'free trade' we should say unhindered or disregulated. There are probably real consequences that stem from using 'free' that way. The South wanted the freedom to practice slavery. :/
The right to secede was theirs, wasn't it? If yes, the why was their business, legally speaking, and a red herring. "My paramount object in the struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or destroy slavery. … If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone, I would also do that." - Abraham Lincoln (What "free"/"unregulated" market? US? You must be kidding me, mk!)
(What "free"/"unregulated" market? US? You must be kidding me, mk!) Oh God no, I don't believe it for a second! That's my point. If the language of NAFTA weren't a "free trade zone" and was instead a "disregulated trade zone", the discussion might be a bit closer to the truth. Of course, maybe "disregulated" isn't even the best term. Maybe "regulated around different priorities".