Britain and the European Union

[dust]

We were never meant to have joined and we did support the new Europe to a greater extent than had been envisaged. I agree with that quote. We did what was necessary for the Europe to become succesful, indeed at one point it was even more succesful than Britain. However, we have done our work, Europe is a long time saved from the state of conflict in which it once rested. We need to get out of their way and let them complete it. It's time for us to heal the rest of the world.

 

The work is never done. There's no such thing as being saved indefinitely from conflict; that the UK is engaged in conflict with nations or groups in other parts of the world does not mean that peace will reign eternally upon Europe.

 

'Times have changed', as they say, but from where I'm sitting it really confirms the need to support and sponsor the EU -- and we can't do that by saying "Nah, better off out.. and you are too."

[Karl]

The work is never done. There's no such thing as being saved indefinitely from conflict; that the UK is engaged in conflict with nations or groups in other parts of the world does not mean that peace will reign eternally upon Europe.

 

'Times have changed', as they say, but from where I'm sitting it really confirms the need to support and sponsor the EU -- and we can't do that by saying "Nah, better off out.. and you are too."

 

Our 'work' as Churchill meant it, is done. Europe grew up. We were supposed to be caretakers not members. We must get out of the way and let them get on with turning it into the Superstate. Britain was never going to fit into a superstate. The Germans understood this, they refer to us 'Inselaffen'.

 

It's a non sequitur to bring up Britains other conflicts. I'm not suggesting we are the peace makers, that was Churchill, but if you accept his argument then it's time to let go of the EU child and let it become what it will.

 

We can carry on trading and allying ourselves with an EU superstate without being a cantankerous member of it. Britain has been attempting to steer the project for its own purposes and of course the aims of the USA. It was Thatcher that brought prosperity to Britain by breaking up the economic dead weight of nationalised industries and deregulating the financial sector. We saw a chance that we might dominate the EU-for it to become part of a new British Empire, but instead, it was the EU that infected Britain. If we remain then we will become an annexe to the EU and will be forced to accept the whole thing and whatever that will bring. We will not be able to change it, completely the opposite, we will not be able to support or sponsor the EU, we will be a small part of it with little influence. Outside we can be a giant of trade and influence.

 

There is a well known saying "it's better to have someone pissing out of the tent than have them pissing into it". For the EU it is better for us to remain because we can be controlled, our place is therefore outside of the tent where we can decide for ourselves which way we piss and how far.

 

Anyway the 23rd is coming and I strongly suspect the 24th will be the beginning of something unpleasant, whichever way the vote goes. Neither side has acquitted themselves well in this feud. It should have been a balanced debate and our PM should have made the decision instead of offering a referendum. The result will be polarising in the worst of ways. Our politicians have engaged in fear mongering of the worst kind and raised emotional terror. They have also lost the last essence of credibility. That genie isn't ever going back in its bottle. The EU itself might well be the least of our problems from the 24th onward.

[joeblast]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/03/21/eu-referendum-who-in-britain-wants-to-leave-and-who-wants-to-rem/

 

Says quite a lot.

 

 

 

 

I'm not certain which wars you are referring to, but I for one would look to the World Wars as honest fights for freedom from a genuine looming threat; and, if we are referring to the World Wars, you should probably let someone who actually conducted one of them on the UK's behalf have a say in the matter:

 

http://www.churchill-society-london.org.uk/astonish.html

 

"It is to re-create the European Family, or as much of it as we can, and provide it with a structure under which it can dwell in peace, in safety and in freedom. We must build a kind of United States of Europe.

...

In order that this should be accomplished, there must be an act of faith in which millions of families speaking many languages must consciously take part.

...

Great Britain ... must be the friends and sponsors of the new Europe and must champion its right to live and shine."

if you dont know all of the financial reasons why the world wars happened, there's plenty of good reading on it.  and it has nothing to do with "the european family"

[dust]

Our 'work' as Churchill meant it, is done. Europe grew up. We were supposed to be caretakers not members. We must get out of the way and let them get on with turning it into the Superstate. Britain was never going to fit into a superstate. The Germans understood this, they refer to us 'Inselaffen'.

 

https://www.quora.com/What-do-the-English-think-of-being-called-Island-apes-Inselaffen-by-the-Germans

 

They use the term to refer to a certain variety of Brit. The violent, alcoholic, xenophobic variety.

 

By choosing insulation and fear, we would be choosing to enforce this stereotype, choosing it for ourselves; by choosing openness and confidence, we would be (among other things) showing that the UK is not all that backwards.

 

 

It's a non sequitur to bring up Britains other conflicts. I'm not suggesting we are the peace makers, that was Churchill, but if you accept his argument then it's time to let go of the EU child and let it become what it will.

 

You misunderstood my point. The important part of that sentence was "does not mean that peace will reign eternally upon Europe."

 

Point being that Europe has a long history of internal conflict; that under the EU, Europe has seen the longest period of relative peace in hundreds of years; and that the UK is not exempt from having benefited from it, and will not be exempt from benefiting from it in the future.

 

 

We can carry on trading and allying ourselves with an EU superstate without being a cantankerous member of it. Britain has been attempting to steer the project for its own purposes and of course the aims of the USA. It was Thatcher that brought prosperity to Britain by breaking up the economic dead weight of nationalised industries and deregulating the financial sector. We saw a chance that we might dominate the EU-for it to become part of a new British Empire, but instead, it was the EU that infected Britain. If we remain then we will become an annexe to the EU and will be forced to accept the whole thing and whatever that will bring. We will not be able to change it, completely the opposite, we will not be able to support or sponsor the EU, we will be a small part of it with little influence. Outside we can be a giant of trade and influence.

 

Your "being a cantankerous member of it" is your choice. If the vote is to leave, it will have become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

 

If the vote is to remain, I hope it will be evidence that the younger generations are in favour of increased international cooperation and peace rather than childish dreams of British Power.

 

Evidence that the British public is changing, that in a few decades the older population will be made up of people who aren't simply trying to reclaim some of the feeling (that they never had, and that the majority of Brits at the time never actually had) of importance and influence some currently associate with the British Empire -- something which has not existed for a long time, and the nostalgia for which is baseless.

 

 

 

Anyway the 23rd is coming and I strongly suspect the 24th will be the beginning of something unpleasant, whichever way the vote goes. Neither side has acquitted themselves well in this feud. It should have been a balanced debate and our PM should have made the decision instead of offering a referendum. The result will be polarising in the worst of ways. Our politicians have engaged in fear mongering of the worst kind and raised emotional terror. They have also lost the last essence of credibility. That genie isn't ever going back in its bottle. The EU itself might well be the least of our problems from the 24th onward.

 

Well, we can agree on most of this.

[Taoist Texts]

Switzerland's voters reject basic income plan - BBC News

BBC News‎ - 2 days ago

Final results from Sunday's referendum showed that nearly 77% opposed the plan, with only 23% backing it

 

this was another effort to finish up Europe by destroying its last hold-out nation-states one by one. the Swiss morals proved too strong so the globalists failed for now. next target: Britain. 

[Apech]

 

Switzerland's voters reject basic income plan - BBC News

BBC News‎ - 2 days ago

Final results from Sunday's referendum showed that nearly 77% opposed the plan, with only 23% backing it

 

this was another effort to finish up Europe by destroying its last hold-out nation-states one by one. the Swiss morals proved too strong so the globalists failed for now. next target: Britain. 

 

Wot?

[Apech]

I can get Sky (not)News here ... I call it (not)News because while all the other news networks report important things happening in the world, SkyNews seems to be obsessed by things like obesity in babies or pictures of the Queen (doing nothing interesting but wearing a hat).  Anyway they had a debate with Michael Gove trying to defend the 'Leave' position.  He was given a spectacularly hard time over 'lying' about the 350m a week we are supposed to pay to the EU and also one gentleman from the audience asked him what the economic plan post Brexit was.  Obviously the answer was waffle.  In fact it wasn't even waffle - there just wasn't anything you could call an answer.  I was very pleased to see that I'm not the only one to ask this.  It seems to me the leave campaign is 'lions led by donkeys' ... despite the fact that I will vote remain I would dearly love to hear the grand vision of an independent UK free from rhetoric, xenophobia and other tripe. 

[Chang]

I can get Sky (not)News here ... I call it (not)News because while all the other news networks report important things happening in the world, SkyNews seems to be obsessed by things like obesity in babies or pictures of the Queen (doing nothing interesting but wearing a hat).  Anyway they had a debate with Michael Gove trying to defend the 'Leave' position.  He was given a spectacularly hard time over 'lying' about the 350m a week we are supposed to pay to the EU and also one gentleman from the audience asked him what the economic plan post Brexit was.  Obviously the answer was waffle.  In fact it wasn't even waffle - there just wasn't anything you could call an answer.  I was very pleased to see that I'm not the only one to ask this.  It seems to me the leave campaign is 'lions led by donkeys' ... despite the fact that I will vote remain I would dearly love to hear the grand vision of an independent UK free from rhetoric, xenophobia and other tripe. 

 

This is just tripe Apech and what’s more you know it.

 

You may belittle Gove but I could equally belittle Dodgy Dave Cameron, the be-whiskered half-wit who leads the Labour Party or God help us Harriet "Women’s Rights" Harman.

 

You may also demand a post Brexit economic plan but I could demand some plan from the E.U. which will not result in economic disaster. The E.U. should be congratulated for their consistency in showing continued incompetence in matters both political and economic. God help us when the E.U. Army becomes a reality.

 

So before you demand other than tripe from the Brexit Brigade perhaps you should demand it from those who share your own entrenched position.

 

To be fair we are unlikely to hear of the grand vision of the E.U. spoken of openly for they prefer to proceed by stealth and disassembly.

[Karl]

https://www.quora.com/What-do-the-English-think-of-being-called-Island-apes-Inselaffen-by-the-Germans

 

They use the term to refer to a certain variety of Brit. The violent, alcoholic, xenophobic variety.

 

By choosing insulation and fear, we would be choosing to enforce this stereotype, choosing it for ourselves; by choosing openness and confidence, we would be (among other things) showing that the UK is not all that backwards.

 

 

 

 

You misunderstood my point. The important part of that sentence was "does not mean that peace will reign eternally upon Europe."

 

Point being that Europe has a long history of internal conflict; that under the EU, Europe has seen the longest period of relative peace in hundreds of years; and that the UK is not exempt from having benefited from it, and will not be exempt from benefiting from it in the future.

 

 

 

 

Your "being a cantankerous member of it" is your choice. If the vote is to leave, it will have become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

 

If the vote is to remain, I hope it will be evidence that the younger generations are in favour of increased international cooperation and peace rather than childish dreams of British Power.

 

Evidence that the British public is changing, that in a few decades the older population will be made up of people who aren't simply trying to reclaim some of the feeling (that they never had, and that the majority of Brits at the time never actually had) of importance and influence some currently associate with the British Empire -- something which has not existed for a long time, and the nostalgia for which is baseless.

 

 

 

 

 

Well, we can agree on most of this.

 

I think you have swallowed the Kool Aid. The reason for European peace was NATO, it had zip all to do with the EU which only began with the single market.

 

Being a member of the EU club is looking inwards, not outwards. It is a customs union that has turned into a political union. The USSR had one of those, lots of countries under one anti-democratic governance. Europe is fast becoming a back water and its member countries are busy tearing the political project apart anyway.

 

Britain needs to look outward to embrace the entire globe and not be stuck in an antiquated 1950s collective which has no future. It was conceived at a time of smoke stacks, mass employment and relatively little labour mobility. The world moved on and the EU didn't. We aren't doing it, or ourselves any favours by getting in any deeper. Technology, connectivity, mobility have made a little customs block an anachronism in a modern world which Europe is no longer the centre. The necessity is now total flexibility and tarrif free trade with countries able to move their economies quickly-not be stuck with a mass of rules and regulations that turns racehorses into lumpen donkeys.

 

Young people are unfortunately lacking in experience, historical perspective and a breadth of reasoned understanding-that's to be expected from the young because they are idealistic, but, once in a while, as they grow older, then they remember the advice of those older folk-funny how that happens ;-) I don't blame the young for feeling as they do, but they have not yet learned to appreciate what freedom costs and how easily it is given away.

[Miffymog]

Just to add to the debate - I'm probably going to vote out. I reckon there will be an initial shock to the economy, but my gut instinct is that it will bounce back, maybe not to what it was before, but it wont be disastrous.

 

For me, we are involved in a sufficiently large enough number of international markets that we should be able to stay up on our own two feet without the need for being part of the EU. We will then regain control over so many things we have lost.

[Karl]

I can get Sky (not)News here ... I call it (not)News because while all the other news networks report important things happening in the world, SkyNews seems to be obsessed by things like obesity in babies or pictures of the Queen (doing nothing interesting but wearing a hat).  Anyway they had a debate with Michael Gove trying to defend the 'Leave' position.  He was given a spectacularly hard time over 'lying' about the 350m a week we are supposed to pay to the EU and also one gentleman from the audience asked him what the economic plan post Brexit was.  Obviously the answer was waffle.  In fact it wasn't even waffle - there just wasn't anything you could call an answer.  I was very pleased to see that I'm not the only one to ask this.  It seems to me the leave campaign is 'lions led by donkeys' ... despite the fact that I will vote remain I would dearly love to hear the grand vision of an independent UK free from rhetoric, xenophobia and other tripe. 

 

Whats the economic plan sans Brexit ? I mean we are doing so well being part of it and Europe is doing so well under it. I wonder who gets to pay for all this arrogance and hubris ? Have the remain campaign answered the question most of the electorate want to hear regarding control of our borders ?

 

350m a week is actually the low number. It represents the figure that is allocated to the EU, a portion of which is held back, but of the total figure that is sent, then the rebated amount is controlled by the EU who allocate the funds as they see fit, through an undemocratically unelected bureacracy. The rest is consumed as our 'contribution'. I don't know what's so difficult to understand. Gove is saying that if we left, then we would control all of that £350 million and could decide for ourselves what we do with it.

 

I don't know why you think politicians will answer any question on the economy, they produce nothing, they trade nothing, they know nothing about business or employment. They sit in their little offices and sponge off the producers. Their 'trade deals' are to benefit certain industries over other industries, we don't require their help in buying things from other people in other countries, they are a hinderance to that function and not a help. There is no point in asking the institutions such as the IMF, BoE etc either, because they are politically biased- it's their plan so they are hardly going to say it's no good.

 

We make our own luck Apech, the freer our hands the faster we work, the freer our minds the greater is the flood of ideas. Anything that shackles us, or limits us, detracts from productive effort. More rules don't make more wealth, they just benefit a select few and steal opportunity from everyone else.

 

This is simple stuff really. If you can't get it then it would seem to me that you are determined not to get it. As I said before, maybe the EU is where your bread gets buttered and that is where your self interest lies. If you were really open to change and growth you would see what the EU is and want to leave.

 

 

[Karl]

Just to add to the debate - I'm probably going to vote out. I reckon there will be an initial shock to the economy, but my gut instinct is that it will bounce back, maybe not to what it was before, but it wont be disastrous.

 

For me, we are involved in a sufficiently large enough number of international markets that we should be able to stay up on our own two feet without the need for being part of the EU. We will then regain control over so many things we have lost.

 

I doubt there will be a specific UK shock except on the global market which is in such a mess of debt and lies that it's terrified of anything which might bring it all crashing down.

 

The U.K. Government have been talking today about the drop of the pound, but the pound is actually up on yesterday against both the dollar and the Euro. Indeed, if you look at the charts it's at a post high since May. So it suggests the market is responding most favourably to news that the Brexit vote is increasing.

 

I think our future out is very bright. The day we leave nothing will happen because we have a full 2 year window to sort out the finer details. We haven't got the Euro-something all the financial institutions warned would be financial suicide and luckily the 'leavers' prevailed over that debacle or we would have been well and truly screwed by now.

[Taoist Texts]

 

Wot?

 Roman politicians passed laws in 140 B.C. to keep the votes of poorer citizens, by introducing a grain dole: giving out cheap food and entertainment, "bread and circuses", became the most effective way to rise to power.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

… Already long ago, from when we sold our vote to no man, the People have abdicated our duties; for the People who once upon a time handed out military command, high civil office, legions — everything, now restrains itself and anxiously hopes for just two things: 

bread and circuses

[6]

[...] 

iam pridem, ex quo suffragia nulli / uendimus, effudit curas; nam qui dabat olim / imperium, fasces, legiones, omnia, nunc se / continet atque duas tantum res anxius optat, /

 

panem et circenses

. [...]

• (Juvenal, Satire 10.77–81)

 

[Apech]

@Chang and Karl,

 

I thought it a backhanded compliment to call you lions led by donkeys but if you don't like it fair enough.

 

I think to propose a radical change (i.e. Brexit) you do owe it to those who you wish to lure over to your side some kind of plan for the future.  There isn't one.  Its as if Brexit is some kind snake oil cure-all.  leave and everything will be alright again.  Its daft.  And the leaders of your campaign could have come up with something at least in expectation of the question.

 

I think Dodgy Dave is insipid and brainless if you wish to know.  We shouldn't be having a referendum at all in my opinion.

[Karl]

@Chang and Karl,

 

I thought it a backhanded compliment to call you lions led by donkeys but if you don't like it fair enough.

 

I think to propose a radical change (i.e. Brexit) you do owe it to those who you wish to lure over to your side some kind of plan for the future.  There isn't one.  Its as if Brexit is some kind snake oil cure-all.  leave and everything will be alright again.  Its daft.  And the leaders of your campaign could have come up with something at least in expectation of the question.

 

I think Dodgy Dave is insipid and brainless if you wish to know.  We shouldn't be having a referendum at all in my opinion.

 

It isn't a radical change, its the EU that is the radical change.

 

I don't owe you a thing, I gave you the facts and my opinion. A country is built on enterprise and not political meandering. Enterprise is the province of the entrepreneur who must make a reasoned guess as to the viability of his enterprise-he does not have it all laid out and even should his plans align at some point, the circumstance is certain to intrude.

 

I did not say 'leave and everything will be all right' but you are saying 'stay and everything will be alright' despite direct evidence to the contrary. What's more the Brexiteers are quite right in not laying out a plan to fool the idiots in the same way the remainers are spouting doom and disaster.

 

We already trade with Europe and the rest of the world, this trade will not alter in any way in the short term and after that it's anyone's guess, in or out. If we could predict the future that well we would omniscient Gods, but we are men and we must make our way the best we can. The freer we are the greater the opportunity.

 

I think you know that is true. I think you are trying to justify your decision by blaming it on guarantees that no one could possibly give and a future in or out that no one can foresee. What we do know is fact- Europe is stagnant, dying, racked by political fracturing, overrun with migrants it cannot cope with and about to invite a Muslim tyrant to become part of the family. Can Britain do better than that-if I didn't think so I would be voting to leave.

[Eques Peregrinus]

 

Switzerland's voters reject basic income plan - BBC News

BBC News‎ - 2 days ago

Final results from Sunday's referendum showed that nearly 77% opposed the plan, with only 23% backing it

 

this was another effort to finish up Europe by destroying its last hold-out nation-states one by one. the Swiss morals proved too strong so the globalists failed for now. next target: Britain. 

 

No, that was a rather vague project made by an group of idealist people which managed to get enough votes to launch an initiative.

 

The initiative was evaluated by the National Council, the State Council and the Federal Council. At an almost unanimity, they all advised the people to reject the initiative. Mostly due to the costs it will imply and the impossibility to live decently with 2500 CHF (about 2600 US $) per month in Switzerland.

 

Then the people had to vote and decided to reject the initiative.

 

It is rather difficult to see how this is related to the EU. Except if the people in the group that launched the initiative were in favour of an adhesion. Although, I doubt much the EU to be this popular at the moment.

[joeblast]

It isn't a radical change, its the EU that is the radical change.

^THIS

What's so hard to understand about this unnatural usurpation of sovereignty?

 

This is precisely what happened to the States in the USA, to the point where federal representatives laugh and scoff at the notion of "states rights" or god forbid the fact  that the local sheriff by design has equal authority to that of the state or federal officials, where his locality is concerned.

 

But try telling that to the jackboots from the federal agencies, most of which are of dubious constitutional authority, and they'd just as soon shoot you in the back, almost catching their coworkers in the crossfire.

[Apech]

It isn't a radical change, its the EU that is the radical change. I don't owe you a thing, I gave you the facts and my opinion. A country is built on enterprise and not political meandering. Enterprise is the province of the entrepreneur who must make a reasoned guess as to the viability of his enterprise-he does not have it all laid out and even should his plans align at some point, the circumstance is certain to intrude. I did not say 'leave and everything will be all right' but you are saying 'stay and everything will be alright' despite direct evidence to the contrary. What's more the Brexiteers are quite right in not laying out a plan to fool the idiots in the same way the remainers are spouting doom and disaster. We already trade with Europe and the rest of the world, this trade will not alter in any way in the short term and after that it's anyone's guess, in or out. If we could predict the future that well we would omniscient Gods, but we are men and we must make our way the best we can. The freer we are the greater the opportunity. I think you know that is true. I think you are trying to justify your decision by blaming it on guarantees that no one could possibly give and a future in or out that no one can foresee. What we do know is fact- Europe is stagnant, dying, racked by political fracturing, overrun with migrants it cannot cope with and about to invite a Muslim tyrant to become part of the family. Can Britain do better than that-if I didn't think so I would be voting to leave.

 

 

I didn't mean you - I meant those leading  the campaign i.e. Gove, IDS, Boris and Farage.

[Apech]

^THIS

What's so hard to understand about this unnatural usurpation of sovereignty?

 

This is precisely what happened to the States in the USA, to the point where federal representatives laugh and scoff at the notion of "states rights" or god forbid the fact  that the local sheriff by design has equal authority to that of the state or federal officials, where his locality is concerned.

 

But try telling that to the jackboots from the federal agencies, most of which are of dubious constitutional authority, and they'd just as soon shoot you in the back, almost catching their coworkers in the crossfire.

 

 

Do you wish to leave the union then?

[Karl]

I didn't mean you - I meant those leading  the campaign i.e. Gove, IDS, Boris and Farage.

 

They look and smell like politicians to me. They were picked by Cameron to lead the out campaign in order to avoid giving credence to UKIP and to prevent too much blue on blue destroying the party. There is a court action pending I believe. However, politicians can't tell you anymore than you can glean for yourself.

[Karl]

Went out leaflet dropping in the area tonight. Had a chat with a few people busy watering their lawns. Initially they were a bit cagey when I asked them how they would be voting. Suprisingly, they were all for leaving. I picked the area as one which might be a big resistant to leaving, so that cheered me up a lot, particularly after reading Apechs opinion.

 

 

What Inhave discovered to my disgust, is that it appears that universities and schools are pushing to remain. A friend of mine is a school teacher and told me how he had 'convinced the kids to vote remain'. I think we seriously need to look at institutional propaganda foisted on vulnerable children in public education and in universities which are pseudo private, but who's employees have a vested interest in persuading those they teach to remain.

Edited June 7, 2016 by Karl

[Apech]

Went out leaflet dropping in the area tonight. Had a chat with a few people busy watering their lawns. Initially they were a bit cagey when I asked them how they would be voting. Suprisingly, they were all for leaving. I picked the area as one which might be a big resistant to leaving, so that cheered me up a lot, particularly after reading Apechs opinion.

 

 

What Inhave discovered to my disgust, is that it appears that universities and schools are pushing to remain. A friend of mine is a school teacher and told me how he had 'convinced the kids to vote remain'. I think we seriously need to look at institutional propaganda foisted on vulnerable children in public education and in universities which are pseudo private, but who's employees have a vested interest in persuading those they teach to remain.

 

The polls suggest young people are more remain and old people more leave.

 

What's wrong with my opinion????

Edited June 7, 2016 by Apech

[Taoist Texts]

It is rather difficult to see how this is related to the EU.  

That's the main point of a conspiracy. Its is difficult to see the big pic until it is too late. Anyway congrats on that.

 

And on this

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/super-rich-swiss-village-opts-for-200000-fine-instead-of-accepting-10-refugees-a7053826.html

 

As for the UK I would be surprised if it would not fold like a lawn chair and stay. It is probably to late to for it to save itself.

[Taoist Texts]

 

 

What Inhave discovered to my disgust, is that it appears that universities and schools are pushing to remain. A friend of mine is a school teacher and told me how he had 'convinced the kids to vote remain'. I think we seriously need to look at institutional propaganda foisted on vulnerable children in public education and in universities which are pseudo private, but who's employees have a vested interest in persuading those they teach to remain.

a fish rots from the head down. All of the intelligentsia depends on govt handouts eventually.

[dust]

I think you have swallowed the Kool Aid. The reason for European peace was NATO, it had zip all to do with the EU which only began with the single market.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Schuman

 

"... he was instrumental in building post-war European and trans-Atlantic institutions and is regarded as one of the founders of the European Union, the Council of Europe and NATO."

 

He never ascribed Europe's peace to NATO, but to the coming together of Europe, beginning in 1951 with the Treaty of Paris (1951).

 

NATO is a widespread military agreement; the EU is a political and economic alliance. The two can't really be compared.

 

Either way, I have not argued, and will not argue, that NATO hasn't played its own peacemaking role; but you equally cannot claim that the EU hasn't.

 

 

Being a member of the EU club is looking inwards, not outwards. It is a customs union that has turned into a political union. The USSR had one of those, lots of countries under one anti-democratic governance. Europe is fast becoming a back water and its member countries are busy tearing the political project apart anyway.

 

We could talk of the USSR, or we could talk of the USA, or China, or any number of other united nations.

 

Anti-democratic? Exactly how? The EP is directly elected; they vote for candidates for Presidency of the EC.

Is this somehow less democratic than the British parliament? A Queen, a House of Lords?

 

 

Young people are unfortunately lacking in experience, historical perspective and a breadth of reasoned understanding-that's to be expected from the young because they are idealistic, but, once in a while, as they grow older, then they remember the advice of those older folk-funny how that happens ;-)

 

You can condescend to the younger generations as you like, though I'll wager that my experience is not as lacking as you would like to believe. And the historical perspective thing? Please. There are at most a few decades between us; we all have equal access to the study of world history. Age is not a winning card here.

 

You have already admitted to ignoring the opinions of the IMF, World Bank, Bank of England, the majority of British MPs, the majority of tech professionals in the City, the majority of businesses in the country, etc. Is there anyone I've forgotten? Oh, the majority of university-educated people, the leaders of the USA, the G7, the OECD...

Edited June 7, 2016 by dustybeijing