Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
2016/03/04 23:43:01
Subject: EU referendum June 23rd! Should Britain stay or go?
Ketara wrote: You're also assuming the EU won't collapse and burn after we exited, or morph into a totalitarian regime.
Oh, wow!
This discussion is kinda pointless, if Brexit camp lives in a reality where EU becoming a totalitarian regime is considered a realistic possibility...
I'm not in the Brexit camp. And many regimes have started from far less auspicious circumstances. Also the more general point being made regardless (if you'd paid closer attention) was that there were assumptions being made about the future of the EU when there was no certainty as regards that future
But by all means don't let me ruin your fun, carry on slopping whitewash all over that 'Brexit' strawman....
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2016/03/04 23:56:22
2016/03/05 00:00:01
Subject: EU referendum June 23rd! Should Britain stay or go?
It was not a strawman, it was literally what you said. And to have an intelligent conversation it is kinda required that participants have at least some sort of a grasp of reality. You have seemed relatively well informed thus far, but that bit about totalitarism was just surreal.
Crimson wrote: It was not a strawman, it was literally what you said. And to have an intelligent conversation it is kinda required that participants have at least some sort of a grasp of reality. You have seemed relatively well informed thus far, but that bit about totalitarism was just surreal.
I wrote a piece or two on that a while back. I'll stick them here in spoiler tags for you:-
The whole EU project is like a ratchet democracy. We edge ever closer in a single direction, no deviation and no way to revert any changes. Sure, a few delays and grumbling happens, but that wheel marked "The European Project" cranks ever onwards, unaffected by elections, MEPs or member states wishes.
This is what bothers me about Europe, and I know it bothers other people too. Da Boss has made it plain that he feels Britain is IN Europe, but we just hang around at the edges, grumbling and obstructing. And he's right. But I don't think that's entirely our fault necessarily, and is more a direct result of the way the EU integration project has happened.
In a nutshell, we signed up for a trade agreement. That entailed setting common trade standards and measurements, an easing of visa application process, etc. But it was basically a trade agreement. As time has rolled on though, the EU integrationists have gradually pushed EU law and responsibility into more and more places where it never had anything to do with anything. Because they have feared a public backlash if they ever stood up and announced the 'United States of Europe', they've always done it subtly. If a country gives an inch, take another, and then don't give it back. Ever. The result has been people feeling, more and more uneasily, that the EU is taking over, and so they've protest voted nobs like Farage into Europe, to try and delay it.
The result has been that the EU bureaucracy has deliberately evolved in such a way as to be unaccountable. To be obscure. To be obfuscatory. In the same way you can't cancel a phone contract if you don't know who to talk to. Nobody ever stands up and says 'I propose the United States of Europe', instead you get some quangocrat proposing that an extension of this law into such another area is a logical proposal, the EUP signs off on it (because nobody pays attention to them when there are national politcs to watch), and gradually gradually, the EU is extended. So now we have an EU President and Foreign Affairs Minister. Then we'll have intelligence co-operation. Next thing is, it'll be a joint border force. Then a multi-national police squad. Which becomes an agency. etcetc. All very slowly slowly, nice and subtle.
The issue as I see it, is that such methods are counter-intuitive to democracy. If a 'United States of Europe' arises by such methods over the next fifty years, what kind of institution will it be? I suspect it will be a highly unaccountable, and somewhat facist one. No regime that comes about from methods like these could be a good one, I think.
What is needed in Europe, is real leadership. Someone with a vision. Someone who stands up and says, 'THIS is what Europe should be'. Be it a two tier trade agreement, a federal power bloc, or a completely integrated unit. Someone who lays it all out, gives it in nice digestible form to voters everywhere, and lets people decide if they're in favour or not.
And you know? It quite possibly should be us at this stage. We've shown little leadership or anything to do with anything right here. We just go, 'change it to something slightly more palatable for the electorate, or we're gone'. We sit and wait, and expect somebody else who represents 'Europe' to cut a deal. When sadly, nobody else in the EU is willing to be forthright, and nobody in the national governments cares enough. If Cameron had the balls, he should be standing up, as one of the G8, the second strongest economy in the EU, one of the world military powers, and saying, 'This is the EU Britain wants to work for. The structure that we want to create, the plan that will determine the future of this organisation. These are the reforms that we need to talk over, the big issues that need to be decided. And soon! Are you in for it, or are we out?' Instead we get, 'Can somebody sign off on a few treaty changes please? Or we might have to pootle off and do our own thing.'
But instead, he's like the rest. No vision. So nobody in Europe does anything.The result is that the EU continues to swell gradually, imperceptibly, like a tumour, gathering power to itself for no other purpose than the acquisition of power.
So! As the voter sitting here now, I'm asking myself. Would I rather be a part of what the EU looks like it will become? Or do I accept that we should probably take a slight hit to our economy and prosperity, but retain our democratic institutions? I had hoped that something clear would emerge from these negotiations, some positive sign of the EU's future that would make it clear to me that we should stay. Instead, I've seen nothing but obfuscation from the European side, and inept leadership all around. The result is that I am beginning to lean slightly towards leaving. We shall see how things proceed....
Spoiler:
When Britain joined, it was primarily because our own attempted trade organisation had failed, we were in the economic doldrums, and we saw the economic prosperity the EU was in and wanted a piece. The French denied us access a few times, but when we finally got in, make no mistake about it, our motivation was trade. Some vague twenty year old comment about pushing European cultural integration really did not register particularly highly on our radar, and the extent to which the EU's tentacles now reach into every level of governmental process was completely unforeseen (by the public at least, and by the government as well I suspect).
Since that time, we've had the vast push eastwards to incoporate as many members as possible. We've had the introduction of the Euro. The Schengen zone. Both of the latter we've managed to stay out of, but it was a narrow thing. There's been a very deliberate drive within the EU to create law on more and more things, and set up cross-border organisations for more and more things. Inter-European arrest warrants would be a good example there. We've got a European President and Foreign Policy now. And I don't believe these things were envisioned back in 1955, nor in the '72 when we joined. So where does it all stop?
The problem with sharing a currency with 26 countries and no real central fiscal control has become apparent. The logical thing to do is to centralise fiscal policy. There's a massive immigration problem across the EU right now. The logical thing to do is to create a joint border patrol force. The terrorism issues? Create a European police/intelligence agency to deal with the matter.
These issues are the ones causing the problems right now, because the obvious solutions mark what I deem to be the final steps towards guaranteeing the creation a Federal Institution in effect if not name (that'll follow on later). Once fiscal policy and currency are centralised, taxation will fall easily. Once the borders and intelligence agencies are merged, the army and police will be shortly behind. And every step of the way, it will be logical, because having a shared currency/borders without those controls and steps just breeds more problems than it solves (as we have seen).
The EU is not willing to make an obvious power grab for these things. Nationalist sentiment is at it's highest ever, and they're not powerful enough. As you noted, they are still technically subservient. Anything too obvious, and they'll face a horrible backlash. But they are aware that, none of the national political leaders of Europe are willing to take a step back and say, 'Schengen/the Euro is clearly not working on this level, let's scrap them', and nobody has the vision to reform the EU structurally. Instead, we get much dithering and hole patching, and temporary solutions. As long as we're not going backwards, we're going forwards, and as said, once any kind of authority/power is ceded to the EU, it never comes back.
The EU superstate is not a done thing yet. Yet. But it's not far off now, and not much more integration is required to make it inevitable, I believe. If nobody puts forward a clear structural vision of where we want Europe to go in the next decade or two, it will ponder along much the way it has done so far, and will become a federal state. Slowly. Painfully. It'll probably take the next forty/fifty years before we finally have a common flag (so to speak). But I believe (you are free to disagree), that the crunch point at which it becomes inevitable is rapidly approaching.
To me, that means I need to decide if we need to pull out now, or if there's still hope. Because as stated, I don't think the institution that will evolve from the current process will be a particularly democratic or good one. YMMV.
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2016/03/05 00:11:51
2016/03/05 00:48:16
Subject: EU referendum June 23rd! Should Britain stay or go?
Being a member of the military for the last 18 years, your comment about our strike power made me smile somewhat.
I've not said we won't be alright though, I have mentioned a number of times that I believe we would be OK, just not as well off as if we were within the EU.
I am interested to learn about why you think the EU will collapse after we leave? That's quite a statement considering how invested the Germans and French are, to name but 2 countries.
Besides, if the EU did collapse, it is likely that the world economy would take a substantial hit, us included. That is very much a scenario no sane, or thoughtful individual would entertain.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Personally, I do agree that perceived power creep is a real issue and fear that must be addressed. I have to admit, it's not a subject I am 100% up on, and I will be looking into it a bit more.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/03/05 00:56:04
"All their ferocity was turned outwards, against enemies of the State, foreigners, traitors, saboteurs, thought-criminals" - Orwell, 1984
2016/03/05 01:29:05
Subject: EU referendum June 23rd! Should Britain stay or go?
r_squared wrote: Personally, I do agree that perceived power creep is a real issue and fear that must be addressed. I have to admit, it's not a subject I am 100% up on, and I will be looking into it a bit more.
That "power creep" is NEVER going to be addressed. The entire purpose of the European Project is 'ever closer union'. The end goal is and has always been a European super state.
2016/03/05 11:27:40
Subject: EU referendum June 23rd! Should Britain stay or go?
Ever closer union does more or less equal a power creep towards a unified United States of Europe. My biggest issue is with how they are going to achieve that goal. I don't think going down this route is the right way. There is too little accountability.
I reckon that us leaving, will give other dissatisfied countries the idea that they can leave too. Not even countries but EuroSkeptics across Europe will realise that there is a way out.
I have the horrible feeling that if we don't leave the EU will go "Everytime is fine, nothing is broken!" And not look at the reasons at why one of the most powerful countries in Europe was a vote close to leaving.
DS:90-S+G+++M++B-IPw40k03+D+A++/fWD-R++T(T)DM+ Warmachine MKIII record 39W/0D/6L
2016/03/05 11:49:29
Subject: EU referendum June 23rd! Should Britain stay or go?
r_squared wrote: Being a member of the military for the last 18 years, your comment about our strike power made me smile somewhat.
I've seen enough facepalms around the JSCSC with regards to current (and indeed, previous) military procurement policy to be completely on board with you there.
At the same time though, we have more amphibious and distance fighting capabilities (or at least, will have once the new carriers come online...) than any other country in the world bar America. Which is nothing to sniff at. China will probably overtake us in the next decade, but we're not doing too badly for a small island of 67 million people!
I've not said we won't be alright though, I have mentioned a number of times that I believe we would be OK, just not as well off as if we were within the EU.
I am interested to learn about why you think the EU will collapse after we leave? That's quite a statement considering how invested the Germans and French are, to name but 2 countries.
Besides, if the EU did collapse, it is likely that the world economy would take a substantial hit, us included. That is very much a scenario no sane, or thoughtful individual would entertain.
I'm not saying it /will collapse, any more than I said it /would become a totalitarian regime. I merely pointed them out as possibilities, to underline the fact that the future was very much an unknowable quantity. Other possibilities would be the emergence of some form of dazzling political leader who unifies it into democratic utopia, a partial collapse which leads to a unification of the core countries with strong economies, nuclear war, and a slow decrepit withering as more and more countries leave over the next few decades. Who can say what will occur?
The main point being made, was that assuming an independent Britain /would be overtaken and left behind by a resurgent European Union is nothing more than that. An assumption. And if history has shown one thing, it's that most institutions crumble and fail sooner or later, and usually sooner!
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/03/05 11:50:03
2016/03/05 11:51:17
Subject: EU referendum June 23rd! Should Britain stay or go?
r_squared wrote: Personally, I do agree that perceived power creep is a real issue and fear that must be addressed. I have to admit, it's not a subject I am 100% up on, and I will be looking into it a bit more.
That "power creep" is NEVER going to be addressed. The entire purpose of the European Project is 'ever closer union'. The end goal is and has always been a European super state.
By or of whom?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/03/05 11:51:46
Currently playing: Infinity, SW Legion
2016/03/05 14:15:05
Subject: Re:EU referendum June 23rd! Should Britain stay or go?
Mr Juncker said that there could be no further negotiations with Britain in the event of a ‘No’ vote.
“It would be very nice if we could put this topic into the attic of world history as soon as possible because if we had to deal with this issue for years to come then everything would go wrong in Europe.
“Therefore, there must not be any renegotiations with the British, who I like otherwise, in case of a 'No'.
"Not only because the British Prime Minister voted against me when I wanted to become president of the Commission but also because he was so glad that we helped him to get a grip on his problem, his self-induced problem.”
When the head of the EU commission is tossing statements like that around, it takes you aback a little. I don't have a problem with him saying, 'No renegotiations', but ascribing part of the reason as being because we voted against him getting into that position? Not exactly very professional. And labelling the referendum a 'problem' and 'contagious'? I'm really not getting a vibe from someone who likes democracy here.
I want the people in the EU to give me a reason to want to stay. They seem determined to do the opposite though...
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2016/03/05 14:18:17
2016/03/05 14:21:17
Subject: EU referendum June 23rd! Should Britain stay or go?
Yep that's the problem with a lot of talk here. It is if EU had will of its own, or at least there were a federalist illuminati running things. Sure, there actually are some people who want Federal Europe, and then there are many who don't want that. Despite what is being claimed, EU is fairly democratic (sure, it could be more transparent) and the decisions about future of EU are being made by people we ourselves have elected (or in case of the Commission, people who are appointed by the people we have elected.)
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/03/05 14:21:30
Mr Juncker said that there could be no further negotiations with Britain in the event of a ‘No’ vote.
“It would be very nice if we could put this topic into the attic of world history as soon as possible because if we had to deal with this issue for years to come then everything would go wrong in Europe.
“Therefore, there must not be any renegotiations with the British, who I like otherwise, in case of a 'No'.
"Not only because the British Prime Minister voted against me when I wanted to become president of the Commission but also because he was so glad that we helped him to get a grip on his problem, his self-induced problem.”
When the head of the EU commission is tossing statements like that around, it takes you aback a little. I don't have a problem with him saying, 'No renegotiations', but ascribing part of the reason as being because we voted against him getting into that position? Not exactly very professional. And labelling the referendum a 'problem' and 'contagious'? I'm really not getting a vibe from someone who likes democracy here.
I want the people in the EU to give me a reason to want to stay. They seem determined to do the opposite though...
Junker is a tool. But people across Europe elected right wing arseholes to the European Parliament, and therefore his bloc had the biggest number of votes. I was pretty pissed off when he got in. I had a thread about it here on Dakka. Junker the arsehole exists because of people voting a particular way.
The referendum IS a problem. Just as the Scottish referendum was a problem for British unionists. Not surprising. He's stupid to mention that he thinks so of course, but a British exit makes the collapse of the Union more likely. I still think you should be allowed a referendum, and Hungary too if they want. The case must be made for Europe in a positive sense, and if we can't do that and people therefore want to leave, that's fair enough. I believe the corporate capture in the EU is much more of a problem than federalisation.
But yeah. Junker is a spanker. Vote socialists into the European Parliament to get rid of him.
But yeah. Junker is a spanker. Vote socialists into the European Parliament to get rid of him.
Then you most likely would get a red Junker. His offensive policies and outbursts are connected to his federalist demands for control and dismissive attitude to accountability, which are independent of whether he is left or right wing.
n'oublie jamais - It appears I now have to highlight this again.
It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. By the juice of the brew my thoughts aquire speed, my mind becomes strained, the strain becomes a warning. It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion.
2016/03/05 23:15:36
Subject: Re:EU referendum June 23rd! Should Britain stay or go?
Interesting article in the Spectator about Turkey's relationship with the EU, and how the Turks could use the threat of migrants flooding the EU to extract concessions from the EU, including a possible fast-track membership plan
For those not familiar with the Spectator, its politics veer to the right, but the article still raises some interesting points.
As James Forsyth mentioned earlier this week, things could get much worse in Turkey. Indeed, they will. Europe’s hope that Turkey will continue to soak up migrants is at best naive; at worst, irresponsible.
Europe desperately needs Turkey to serve as a migrant waiting room on its borders. In exchange, it has offered an acceleration of the EU admission process. In November, Turkey was promised visa-free travel to the Schengen zone by 2016. In December, after five years of standstill, negotiations concerning economic and monetary policies linked to Turkey’s EU membership were reopened.
This entire deal rests on the peculiar idea that, if given the chance, Turkey would be a Europhile with the zeal of a convert. When the incumbent Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu came into office, he declared that January 2015 would be ‘European month’. Soon after, his government inaugurated a five-year European strategy aiming to close all accession chapters in just two years. After the Charlie Hebdo attacks, he marched with the other leaders in Paris. All this was sending a clear message: ‘We are part of Europe. Europe is us, we are Europe.’
However Davutoğlu’s words should be taken like ayran, Turkey’s non-alcoholic national drink: with a pinch of salt. All the cosying up came to nothing when President Erdoğan forcefully supressed the Gezi Park demonstrations. In a symbolic twist, the visiting German Green Party leader wound up tear-gassed at the event. What’s more, it has been suggested recently that Erdoğan’s government may be supporting the Syrian branch of al-Qaeda (Jabhat al-Nusra). Some traced this to a shared conservative Islamist ideology; others to the shared goal of weakening the Kurds, a strategy that is unlikely to find many European allies.
The promise of EU accession is in itself a fundamental paradox. Europe is encouraging Turkey to retain migrants within its borders. In exchange it is promising Turkey EU membership. Presumably, such membership would entail the free movement of people. Then, all poorly-tracked and half-integrated refugees would be free to complete their journey to Europe. The gapping hole in the plan shows just how little thought or credibility the offer of membership has been given.
Why then, has Turkey been entertaining migrant negotiations with the EU? All this boils down to a simple truth that the EU must understand if it wants to continue this pragmatic partnership: Turkey’s foreign policy is an extension of Erdoğan’s domestic policy. The recent negotiations over the migrant crisis have given the President what he wants. He will take particular pride in showing the West that Europe needs Turkey more than Turkey needs Europe.
And make no mistake, Turkey is well aware of its upper hand in these negotiations. In last month’s leaked recordings, Erdoğan told Donald Tusk and Jean-Claude Juncker that with the proposed 3 billion Euro support, Turkey might as well ‘open the doors to Greece and Bulgaria anytime and we can put the refugees on buses’. With Chancellor Merkel flying over for talks with Davutoğlu and Erdoğan every few weeks, it is a sure sign of desperation. Turkey is also well aware that the leaders of Germany and France — two of the most immigrant-strained countries — are both facing elections in 2016 and 2017. It is only a matter of time before the blackmail intensifies.
But the clock is ticking. As Europe struggles for leverage, Turkey continues to take in refugees. Turkey has so far housed 2.5 million immigrants, spending close to $10 billion to date. In the early days of the Syrian civil war, Ankara’s self-confidence committed it to an open-door policy. Only some 10 percent of these refugees are currently living in camps. So far the assimilation has been relatively seamless, thanks to the regional ethnic similarities, Muslim majority and accommodating informal economy.
But now, things are beginning to creak at the seams. This summer, 33 people were killed in the Kurdish town of Suruç by a suicide bomber. In October, an explosion at a peace rally in Ankara took 102 lives. In January, ten Germans were killed in Istanbul’s Sultan Ahmet by an Isis-affiliated bomber.
What is more, a cottage industry of fake-life jackets has been one of the least palatable by-products of the crisis in Turkey. In January the police seized over 1250 non-buoyant jackets from Izmir. In the tradition of ‘Pradda’ bags, the lifejackets were labelled ‘Yamaxa’, rather than Yamaha.
What happens when Turkey reaches capacity? It is time for us to smell the coffee. Turkey has no real interest in bailing out Europe and the EU is running out of things to offer. The real question is this – when will Turkey’s floodgates open?
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2016/03/06 12:23:23
"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd
2016/03/06 13:51:53
Subject: Re:EU referendum June 23rd! Should Britain stay or go?
So turkey is accepting any and all because no matter how much of a problem they make, they will be taken to Europe by bus as soon as turkey gets into the schengen zone?
It seems that the world is just not universally civilised enough for the type of arrangements the EU wants to make and borders are still required.
Maybe the EU's biggest failing is actually it's hubris?
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-px27tzAtVwZpZ4ljopV2w "ashtrays and teacups do not count as cover"
"jack of all trades, master of none; certainly better than a master of one"
The Ordo Reductor - the guy's who make wonderful things like the Landraider Achillies, but can't use them in battle..
2016/03/06 15:03:45
Subject: Re:EU referendum June 23rd! Should Britain stay or go?
Turkey does not meet the entry criteria, surely? Allowing them to join would involve turning a blind eye and breaking the rules, as the EU did when it turned a blind eye to Greece's dodgy financials.
Turkey has severe issues with human rights. Its an authoritarian state that arrests journalists and forcibly nationalizes newspapers. It turns a blind eye to terrorism when convenient, and is using ISIS to undermine the Syrian government. Its also indirectly helping ISIS through its bombing campaign against the Kurds. And secularism in Turkey is becoming undermined by moves to Islamize the country.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/03/06 15:04:03
2016/03/06 15:21:21
Subject: Re:EU referendum June 23rd! Should Britain stay or go?
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote: Turkey does not meet the entry criteria, surely? Allowing them to join would involve turning a blind eye and breaking the rules, as the EU did when it turned a blind eye to Greece's dodgy financials.
Turkey has severe issues with human rights. Its an authoritarian state that arrests journalists and forcibly nationalizes newspapers. It turns a blind eye to terrorism when convenient, and is using ISIS to undermine the Syrian government. Its also indirectly helping ISIS through its bombing campaign against the Kurds. And secularism in Turkey is becoming undermined by moves to Islamize the country.
It's also one of the worlds strongest economies. It's in the top 20. Money is power.
DS:90-S+G+++M++B-IPw40k03+D+A++/fWD-R++T(T)DM+ Warmachine MKIII record 39W/0D/6L
2016/03/06 15:24:26
Subject: Re:EU referendum June 23rd! Should Britain stay or go?
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote: Turkey does not meet the entry criteria, surely? Allowing them to join would involve turning a blind eye and breaking the rules, as the EU did when it turned a blind eye to Greece's dodgy financials.
Turkey has severe issues with human rights. Its an authoritarian state that arrests journalists and forcibly nationalizes newspapers. It turns a blind eye to terrorism when convenient, and is using ISIS to undermine the Syrian government. Its also indirectly helping ISIS through its bombing campaign against the Kurds. And secularism in Turkey is becoming undermined by moves to Islamize the country.
Yep, it won't happen. I have nothing against Turkey joining if they fix their human rights situation, but it doesn't seem like they're in any hurry with that.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/03/06 15:24:46
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote: Turkey does not meet the entry criteria, surely? Allowing them to join would involve turning a blind eye and breaking the rules, as the EU did when it turned a blind eye to Greece's dodgy financials.
Turkey has severe issues with human rights. Its an authoritarian state that arrests journalists and forcibly nationalizes newspapers. It turns a blind eye to terrorism when convenient, and is using ISIS to undermine the Syrian government. Its also indirectly helping ISIS through its bombing campaign against the Kurds. And secularism in Turkey is becoming undermined by moves to Islamize the country.
Yep, it won't happen. I have nothing against Turkey joining if they fix their human rights situation, but it doesn't seem like they're in any hurry with that.
If the European elite wants it to happen, they'll make it happen. Human Rights or no.
2016/03/06 16:10:00
Subject: Re:EU referendum June 23rd! Should Britain stay or go?
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote: Turkey does not meet the entry criteria, surely? Allowing them to join would involve turning a blind eye and breaking the rules, as the EU did when it turned a blind eye to Greece's dodgy financials.
Turkey has severe issues with human rights. Its an authoritarian state that arrests journalists and forcibly nationalizes newspapers. It turns a blind eye to terrorism when convenient, and is using ISIS to undermine the Syrian government. Its also indirectly helping ISIS through its bombing campaign against the Kurds. And secularism in Turkey is becoming undermined by moves to Islamize the country.
Yep, it won't happen. I have nothing against Turkey joining if they fix their human rights situation, but it doesn't seem like they're in any hurry with that.
If the European elite wants it to happen, they'll make it happen. Human Rights or no.
Europe has happily ignored its own continental dictatorships and authoritarian regimes since the end of ww2. It has happily ignored Turkeys continued efforts at extermination of the armenians and now the Kurds for years.
The EU has been happy to have Turkey as a manufacturing and industrial base for EU companies whilst actively committing abuses against protesters and dissidents.
2016/03/06 16:18:18
Subject: EU referendum June 23rd! Should Britain stay or go?
It would be shameful to let Turkey into the EU but there are many pushing for it. Some just want to keep expanding the EU even to take in countries that are financially corrupt or have human rights abuses. The push for federalisation lead to letting countries into the single currency who shouldn't have been allowed. Countries like Greece are an obvious weak link, and when it all goes wrong Germany and others still expect non-Euro currency members to help bail out. A single currency with France and Germany I could consider, but not carrying weak economies like Greece and cleaning up their mess.
2016/03/06 16:19:14
Subject: Re:EU referendum June 23rd! Should Britain stay or go?
We'll be hearing a lot more about Turkey these next few months, and not just because of the Syrian civil war, and of course, the shameful crackdown on the Turkish press by the Turkish government, but because it's in the OUT camp's interest to keep pushing this.
Remain will probably win the economic argument, but OUT have got the immigration argument well and truly won.
But which argument will prevail: economy or immigration?
In a way it's sad to see the argument boiling down to this, because I believe that democracy should be at the forefront of our EU membership, but there you go...
"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd
2016/03/06 20:54:43
Subject: EU referendum June 23rd! Should Britain stay or go?
I will say it now already: the UK referendum will result in the majority of British people voting to stay in the EU. My prediction is 55% stay and 45% leave if the Leave guys do a good campaign. Otherwise 63% stay and 37% leave, which is still a significant amount of EU-skeptics in the eyes of the shocked media.
Lets be real here. We're talking about ordinary Joe and Jane from down the street (and Abdul and Gupta and Vladimir the polish guy who also get to vote). And the bankers. And the businessmen. And the school teachers. And the nurses. And pretty much the majority of govt employees, professors and other academics in this country. You think all of these people want Britain to secede from the EU? Fat chance of that happening.
It's always easy to say "the EU" is the "people at Brussels over there who we didn't elect and who get to decide everything for us". It's nonsense. You and me, our local politicians, all of us are part of the EU. We elected our representatives in Brussels (if you bothered voting in the EU elections, that is) We have to actively work together to make this a better union rather than pointing the finger and laying the blame on others and not considering ourselves a part of the whole.
Because let's face it - the future is going to be dominated by Russia, China, Brazil, India and the US and if we break up into tiny nations the rest of the world will just laugh at us rather than taking our continent seriously ever again. Nationalism divides us into even tinier specs of insignificance - remember how Yugoslavia used to be a somewhat big and weighty country? Now it is a bunch of tiny countries and people cant even name most of them - literally insignificant - also, in fact all of you who were (are) so proud of the British Empire are obviously proud because of its size and dominating nature and the fact is that this empire was made up of many different faiths and creeds, which is exactly what the EU is all about. I doubt any one of you would look fondly to the days past, had England remained a small kingdom confined by its initial national borders. Therefore my recommendation is to say yes to a future in the EU, and help shape it, and be part of something greater, or revert back to a small island the size of guangdong province.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/03/07 10:45:52
Ravenous D wrote: 40K is like a beloved grandparent that is slowly falling into dementia and the rest of the family is in denial about how bad it is.
squidhills wrote: GW is scared of girls. Why do you think they have so much trouble sculpting attractive female models? Because girls have cooties and the staff at GW don't like looking at them for too long because it makes them feel funny in their naughty place.
2016/03/06 21:26:47
Subject: EU referendum June 23rd! Should Britain stay or go?
Also, like Sir Arun above, I think that it'll be about 60-40 in favour of Stay. I also think that if Leave does win, there will be another vote within a year or two that Stay will win, like in all the other places that have voted to leave.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2016/03/06 23:10:03
Judging by the authors, I think it would be correct to say that this document reflects the intended future progress of the EU.
This report has been prepared by the President of the European Commission, in close cooperation with the President of the Euro Summit, the President of the Eurogroup, the President of the European Central Bank, and the President of the European Parliament.
Progress must happen on four fronts: first, towards a genuine Economic Union that ensures each economy has the structural features to prosper within the Monetary Union. Second, towards a Financial Union that guarantees the integrity of our currency across the Monetary Union and increases risk-sharing with the private sector. This means completing the Banking Union and accelerating the Capital Markets Union. Third, towards a Fiscal Union that delivers both fiscal sustainability and fiscal stabilisation. And finally, towards a Political Union that provides the foundation for all of the above through genuine democratic accountability, legitimacy and institutional strengthening. All four Unions depend on each other. Therefore, they must develop in parallel and all euro area Member States must participate in all Unions.
That's pretty straightforward again.
This longer-term vision needs the measures in the short term to be ambitious. They need to stabilise the European house now and prepare the ground for a complete architecture in the medium term. This will inevitably involve sharing more sovereignty over time... In practice, this would require Member States to accept increasingly joint decision-making on elements of their respective national budgets and economic policies.
My word. Thank you for linking to the article which pointed out this document. It really is quite....enlightening. I find this following extract to be of great interest.
To secure EMU’s long-term success, we should go a step further and push for a deeper integration of national labour markets by facilitating geographic and professional mobility, including through better recognition of qualifications, easier access to public sector jobs for non-nationals and better coordination of social security systems.
So they intend to further break down national boundaries from EU citizens with regards to the job market and broaden the appropriate social welfare schemes. Which is more or less the exact opposite of what Cameron was trying to negotiate for. In light of that, I hold little hope of the agreements he made being honoured for any length of time.
There really is plenty of specifics in here to chew over. At least the desire for political Union is out in the open. Backed by all five Presidents, it also is beyond controversy. Now I simply need to decide if I am willing to hand my country's sovereignty over to the EU over the next fifteen years, or not. It really does make the choice that simple.
Yep that's the problem with a lot of talk here. It is if EU had will of its own, or at least there were a federalist illuminati running things.
Whilst I wouldn't go as far as to call them 'illuminati' (let's not be facetious), the signatories to the above document would seem to illustrate precisely who.
And they will just be the tip of the iceberg. There will be plenty of federalists throughout the various offices and quangos and suchlike beyond them. There's a reason there's such a unity of purpose at the top of the EU, it's because the people there are symptomatic of the people employed by the EU. I daresay there's probably a number of people who aren't the same, but the strength of the federalist drive has been clearly highlighted here. Certainly, it goes far beyond what was envisioned fifty, or even thirty years ago.
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2016/03/07 00:31:18
2016/03/07 02:09:00
Subject: EU referendum June 23rd! Should Britain stay or go?
While all the other parties except the Conservatives have a single position, and almost all of those want in, the grass roots have a different idea.
There is a lot of focus on the right wing populace who want out, there is also a strong and largely overlooked movement in the traditional working class left who want out also. The Labour elite are mostly middle class and on Europe have more in common with the Lib Dems than traditional Labour. The old left is subdued but not gone, its still the largest voting block in the north and midlands.
The ethnic vote is also different than expected. The ideal is that ethnic minorities are in favour of immigration, because they immigrated. It mostly dovetails with the conditioning that claims anti-immigration is an issue of white right wing racists. Actually immigration is also an issue to the asian communities also.
Outside of immigration a lot of people are concerned with EU control moves, and those concerns break the left right divide. There is also a concern amongst the populace as a wghole that the polticians on both sides are voting for and against based on the interests of their favoured corporate paymasters. As both sides produce senior businessmen who claim that voting for the other is bad for British business it is easy to see how this comes about. After all both positions could be true, some businesses will benefit by remaining in the EU, others by its absence, and those business leaders out of self interest alone will call the entire referendum as good or bad for business solely on their own personal predicted profit or loss. As big business holds many MPs in its pocket, and certainly not just Tory ones, it is not a desperate stretch to speculate whether the MPs choices are based on the expected most profitable outcome for the specific company that promises to employ them once they have completed thier time in the Commons.
n'oublie jamais - It appears I now have to highlight this again.
It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. By the juice of the brew my thoughts aquire speed, my mind becomes strained, the strain becomes a warning. It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion.
2016/03/07 07:47:38
Subject: Re:EU referendum June 23rd! Should Britain stay or go?
Ketara: Pretty fair arguments there. I think that's the real question you guys need to ask - do you want to be part of a federal Europe? Because I believe without federalization the union is doomed anyway.
I think it's a pretty reasonable point to pull out of the Union on personally. I can understand that standpoint.
2000 l 
2000 l 
2000 l 
1500 l 
1000 l 
1000 l 
Blood Ravens (using Ravenguard CT) 1500 l 
1500 l
