Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
France is going to be interesting these next few days. Can't wait for Australia to follow suit
People don't read enough history obviously.
Yup.
No, not Hitler in particular. Europe in the 20s and 30s was rife with countries electing/appointing similarly racist, populist and anti-globalist governments arguably due to the existential crisis brought about by the results of the First World War, the breakup of the empires and the Great Depression. At least then you could argue that they had a legitimate excuse for leaning towards so-called easy solutions.Could you clarify that position?
Or is it just going to be allusions to Hitler?
No, not Hitler in particular. Europe in the 20s and 30s was rife with countries electing/appointing similarly racist, populist and anti-globalist governments arguably due to the existential crisis brought about by the results of the First World War, the breakup of the empires and the Great Depression. At least then you could argue that they had a legitimate excuse for leaning towards so-called easy solutions.
But probably more what I was referring to is the historical (and current) benefits of the EU as an institution which has done a lot to bring some level of stability and cooperation to a continent that had been devastated by two world wars. All of which is being put in jeopardy because a lot of people don't like foreigners or don't understand the importance of the EU beyond it putting restrictions on national sovereignty (to not let in foreigners). The pretense about it being about the primacy of national sovereignty has as much legitimacy as claiming the US Civil War was all about "states' rights".
If you want a recent example of why electing populist right-wingers is generally a terrible idea, you don't have to look too far currently.
Avoided European war for 62 years. How is that for starters.How exactly has the EU brought stability and co-operation to Europe in the wake of the World Wars? What "historical and current benefits" has it offered? As far as I can tell each country is as divided and self interested as ever. What has the EU done that you've concluded it has brought Europe together other than a begrudgingly agreed international trade relation weighted to benefit a small few, primarily Germany?
What exactly would France (and the departed UK) stand to gain from such a relationship?
As far as I can tell in terms of annual contributions to the EU there are no benefits and it seems to ask a lot of the wealthier countries, particularly in the area of immigration, with absolutely nothing to be benefited in the short or long term.
Avoided European war for 62 years. How is that for starters.
On HTC 2PS6200 using BigFooty.com mobile app
In circumstances where europe had not been without a war for that long for nearly a millennium it is a bloody good baseline.That's not really a good baseline.
I would've thought after the largest war in recorded history most European countries would be agreeable and do anything that avoided war for their own interests. Do you really think this couldn't have been achieved in the wake of World War 2 without a European Union?
In circumstances where europe had not been without a war for that long for nearly a millennium it is a bloody good baseline.
After the 'war to end wars'they managed 21 years. Anything that gets you to 62+ has got to be working.
On HTC 2PS6200 using BigFooty.com mobile app
You may want to read a little about European Coal and Steel Community (a precursor to the EU) and its role in bringing together France and Germany as co-operative partners rather than spiteful enemies. It was very, very important and provided a basis for appeasement and a framework for peace between two countries that fought fairly constantly from the late 19th century onwards.How exactly has the EU brought stability and co-operation to Europe in the wake of the World Wars?
As I said, political stability but also: free trade and reduction of tariffs and customs (better for the economy and consumers), free people movement (also good for the economy in terms of employment and tourism), improved security (better integration and sharing of information between states), increased legal rights...What "historical and current benefits" has it offered? As far as I can tell each country is as divided and self interested as ever. What has the EU done that you've concluded it has brought Europe together other than a begrudgingly agreed international trade relation weighted to benefit a small few, primarily Germany?
What exactly would France (and the departed UK) stand to gain from such a relationship?
As far as I can tell in terms of annual contributions to the EU there are no benefits and it seems to ask a lot of the wealthier countries, particularly in the area of immigration, with absolutely nothing to be benefited in the short or long term.
Funnily enough you would have thought most European countries would have thought the same after the First World War (known as "The War to End All Wars"), wouldn't you?I would've thought after the largest war in recorded history most European countries would be agreeable and do anything that avoided war for their own interests. Do you really think this couldn't have been achieved in the wake of World War 2 without a European Union?
Not between the member states and not between two of the biggest dogs in the fight, France and Germany, who have been, in one form or another, at each other's throats since the break up of the Carolingian Empire in 814 AD.Are you saying there hasn't been a war in Europe since World War 2?
N
Not between the member states and not between two of the biggest dogs in the fight, France and Germany, who have been, in one form or another, at each other's throats since the break up of the Carolingian Empire in 814 AD.
The EU was a great experiment in stability and mutual cooperation and while it is mired in bureaucracy and is dominated by the two aforementioned dogs I do believe it was a positive thing.
You may want to read a little about European Coal and Steel Community (a precursor to the EU) and its role in bringing together France and Germany as co-operative partners rather than spiteful enemies. It was very, very important and provided a basis for appeasement and a framework for peace between two countries that fought fairly constantly from the late 19th century onwards.
As I said, political stability but also: free trade and reduction of tariffs and customs (better for the economy and consumers), free people movement (also good for the economy in terms of employment and tourism), improved security (better integration and sharing of information between states), increased legal rights...
The problem of course is that it's much more popular domestically for politicians to rip into the EU then to actually explain the benefits. You just have to watch some of the Yes, Minister episodes in the 80s to see that not a lot has changed.
Funnily enough you would have thought most European countries would have thought the same after the First World War (known as "The War to End All Wars"), wouldn't you?
I understand skepticism in the benefits of the EU but to deny that there are any benefits at all is just misinformed, in my view.
There will always be bureaucracy. It's an unavoidable end game of democracies. Without the EU there would arguably be more. Just less centralised.