The United Kingdom; The European Union; NATO: which is the primary sense of identity?

[Franconicus]

Is there some larger entity, aside from your close family and friends, for whom you would make, or at least risk, significant sacrifice?

Europe, of course.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Europe, of course.

Not humanity at large and not the land of your birth?

And how do you define "Europe?"

Culturally? Geographically?

[Franconicus]

Not humanity at large and not the land of your birth?

And how do you define "Europe?"

Culturally? Geographically?

Culturally, of course. There is only one thing missing to give Europe the identity you ask for - a war, or better a civil war.

I once attended a presentation of Google and they showed that they had scanned and investigated billions of documents from all time. They showed on result: up to the American Civil War the name UNITED STAES OF AMERICA was used in plural (the USA are ...). After the CW things changed rapidly and soon it was used in singular (the USA is ...). So I hope you see what I am saying.

Well, the succession of Britain is a wonderful opportunity ...

Jokes aside, nobody in the EU wants to force the English to stay in the EU.

The European Unity stands for freedom, independency, wealth and peace. the fundament is (or should be) humanism.
I work side by side with people from Spain, France and Italy. Some of my neighbours are Poles, Italians, Greek, Turks and so on. It does not matter. We all have a lot in common.

Regarding independency: The English want to gain independency fro EU as far as I understood. Now the British prime minister was the first one to visit Trump, because the Brits desperately need a good agreement with the US, while Trump has only little ambitions to help them. Only benefit would be to weaken the EU. On the other side, the US government asked Germany to negotiate the "unfair" trade conditions between our countries. The German government had to reply that negotiations about trade can only be made with the EU.

For me it seems to be better to be an dependent part of the EU as to be as independent as Britain.

[Greyblades]

The European Unity stands for freedom, independency, wealth and peace.

Presumably this is why the EU dictates law from above, pushes for an ever closer union, keeps greece in perpetual debt and tried to avoid having to vet likely terrorists.

[Husar]

Presumably this is why the EU dictates law from above

Lies, your government does the same thing essentially.
In fact even Merkel isn't elected directly, might as well join Erdogan and call her a dictator.

[Franconicus]

Presumably this is why the EU dictates law from above, pushes for an ever closer union, keeps greece in perpetual debt and tried to avoid having to vet likely terrorists.

Hi Greyblades,

blame it on my bad English, but I really do not understand what you`re saying.

The EU has only the power the countries gave her. But I agree that there should be a parliament, directly elected by the people which elects the EU government. Then I would be pleased to get rid of the government in Berlin. But that I something the English want to avoid, right?The problem is not the power or weakness of Europe, the problem lies within the national governments.
By the way, I know a Scot who would say that London dictates laws from above.

Regarding Greece I guess the problem is a bit more tricky and although I do not agree with all that Germany or the EU did, I have to admit that they tried a lot to help Greece from ruin. By the way, what did GB do to help Greece?

Beside that all the EU is still essential for peace. Look what is happening now. GB is still in the EU and the old wounds already begin to ache again. Scotland wants to leave the UK, London vetoes that, there will be a hard border through Ireland which may cause a lot of trouble again. The old issue regarding Gibraltar pops up again. All those little local conflicts, which calmed down in the EU, are back again.

[Greyblades]

Hi Greyblades,

blame it on my bad English, but I really do not understand what you`re saying.

I'm saying that your assertion that the EU stands for freedom, independency, wealth and peace is not consistent with thier recent actions; it has made it's component parts less free, independant, wealthy and peaceful as exhibited in my examples.

The problem is not the power or weakness of Europe, the problem lies within the national governments.

Europe clinging to the EU by their own voulition does not invalidate the EU's problems anymore than america's adoption of Obamacare invalidates it's problems.

The EU is flawed, it's actions the origin of many of it's member's woes and it's operators are obstinant and hostile to attempts at reform.

By the way, I know a Scot who would say that London dictates laws from above.

And I know an american who says washington is run by lizardmen.

Westminster repeatedly devolving power to edinburgh proves your scot's accusations hollow.

Regarding Greece I guess the problem is a bit more tricky and although I do not agree with all that Germany or the EU did, I have to admit that they tried a lot to help Greece from ruin. By the way, what did GB do to help Greece?

If by try to help you mean force the greeks into self destruction through austerity. GB isnt the one who turned a greek nationalist party into a mewling lapdog.

Beside that all the EU is still essential for peace. Look what is happening now. GB is still in the EU and the old wounds already begin to ache again. Scotland wants to leave the UK, London vetoes that, there will be a hard border through Ireland which may cause a lot of trouble again. The old issue regarding Gibraltar pops up again. All those little local conflicts, which calmed down in the EU, are back again.

The rise of seperatism is nowhere near the violation of the peace the incursion of terrorist networks are, incursions the EU's stubborn clinging to freedom of movement facilitated.

Lies, your government does the same thing essentially.
In fact even Merkel isn't elected directly, might as well join Erdogan and call her a dictator.

Neither is my Prime minister, but my legislative body is elected; the EU's is appointed.

The EU's laws are leashed by the whims of an unelected and unaccountable beaurocrat; laws dicated from an above.

[Husar]

Neither is my Prime minister, but my legislative body is elected; the EU's is appointed.

The EU's laws are leashed by the whims of an unelected and unaccountable beaurocrat; laws dicated from an above.

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/aboutp...slative-powers

The ordinary legislative procedure gives the same weight to the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union on a wide range of areas (for example, economic governance, immigration, energy, transport, the environment and consumer protection). The vast majority of European laws are adopted jointly by the European Parliament and the Council.

What's really strange either way though, is that the EU was formed this way by the member countries. It's not like Juncker announced the EU one day and then forced all of Europe to bow to its will. The European Council consists of people sent by the member states, probably chosen in the same way your prime minister or his ministers/secretaries are chosen. Going by how the link above states that the parliament got a bit more power with every new treaty, and by how the people reacted to the lisbon treaty, I would assume the same people who complain about the MEPs not having enough power are also the first to complain if their country wants to ratify a trety giving them more power. The current state of the EU seems like a weird compromise between the desire to centralize and the reluctance to give away national power...
Take for example the council members, who would appoint them if we scrapped national governments? The simplest replacement would be a direct vote by the people of the former nations.
Of course we could just scrap the thing or hope it can be more centralized once a few countries have left.

[Franconicus]

I'm saying that your assertion that the EU stands for freedom, independency, wealth and peace is not consistent with thier recent actions; it has made it's component parts less free, independant, wealthy and peaceful as exhibited in my examples.

Europe clinging to the EU by their own voulition does not invalidate the EU's problems anymore than america's adoption of Obamacare invalidates it's problems.

The EU is flawed, it's actions the origin of many of it's member's woes and it's operators are obstinant and hostile to attempts at reform.

And I know an american who says washington is run by lizardmen.

Westminster repeatedly devolving power to edinburgh proves your scot's accusations hollow.


If by try to help you mean force the greeks into self destruction through austerity. GB isnt the one who turned a greek nationalist party into a mewling lapdog.
The rise of seperatism is nowhere near the violation of the peace the incursion of terrorist networks are, incursions the EU's stubborn clinging to freedom of movement facilitated.
Neither is my Prime minister, but my legislative body is elected; the EU's is appointed.

The EU's laws are leashed by the whims of an unelected and unaccountable beaurocrat; laws dicated from an above.

I think I understand your point of view, which seems to be shared by many English and I agree with you that BREXIT is something good and should be executed rapidly.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

The EU has only the power the countries gave her. But I agree that there should be a parliament, directly elected by the people which elects the EU government. Then I would be pleased to get rid of the government in Berlin. But that I something the English want to avoid, right?The problem is not the power or weakness of Europe, the problem lies within the national governments.
By the way, I know a Scot who would say that London dictates laws from above.

The standard British objection is that we did not vote to surrender power to Brussels, only to join the EEC. Our Freedom from the Tyranny of well-meaning zealots was hard-won in several Civil Wars and we are touchy about giving it up. That is why more people voted out than in.

Regarding Greece I guess the problem is a bit more tricky and although I do not agree with all that Germany or the EU did, I have to admit that they tried a lot to help Greece from ruin. By the way, what did GB do to help Greece?

The EU allowed Greece to join the Euro despite it not meeting the prerequisite economic conditions, they then imposed regime change as a condition of a bailout when the Greek economy collapsed. When the Greeks later regained a democratically elected government they held a Referendum rejecting the punishing terms of the bailout so that the EU and IMF then imposed even more punishing terms as a condition of continuing Aid monies which were glossed as a loan.

Many in britain repeatedly argued this was immoral but were told to shut up as we aren't part of the Euro. Whilst we did not give Greece any strings-free Aid we DID give the Irish a "loan" which irrc had such flaccid terms of repayment it might as well have been aid.

Beside that all the EU is still essential for peace. Look what is happening now. GB is still in the EU and the old wounds already begin to ache again. Scotland wants to leave the UK, London vetoes that, there will be a hard border through Ireland which may cause a lot of trouble again. The old issue regarding Gibraltar pops up again. All those little local conflicts, which calmed down in the EU, are back again.

The EU is not essential for peace, unless the alternative is Germany enforcing its political and economic hegemony by force.

As to Scotland - the breakup of the UK is inevitable now, a unified United Kingdom died when the Labour Government of the Day created Devolved Administrations in Wales and Scotland. In the Westminster System devolution has always proceeded Independence and Independence was the ultimate aim of demanding Devolution in Scotland. In fact, the Scottish demand that Scotland remain in the Single Market amounts to a demand for functional Independence from Westminster of the type enjoyed by the Channel Islands and Mann. This is why the demand for a Referendum is being rejected right now - because the SNP is basically threatening to hold a referndum on Independence if they don't get Independence.

[Franconicus]

The EU allowed Greece to join the Euro despite it not meeting the prerequisite economic conditions, they then imposed regime change as a condition of a bailout when the Greek economy collapsed. When the Greeks later regained a democratically elected government they held a Referendum rejecting the punishing terms of the bailout so that the EU and IMF then imposed even more punishing terms as a condition of continuing Aid monies which were glossed as a loan.

Isn't it funny that the same people who say that the EU has too much control are also blaming the EU for believing the Greek numbers.
I am not saying that the way the EU or Germany acted was good, but the root of the problems lies within Greece. And it is a simple facts that if your borrow money you give away freedom.

The EU is not essential for peace, unless the alternative is Germany enforcing its political and economic hegemony by force.

It is.
Last thing Germany wants is to become leader in Europe. However, it has the biggest population, the strongest economy and lays right in the middle. Germany really hesitated to lead in the financial crisis and was driven by the others. Now it is blamed for everything that is not good.
One of the reason the EU was founded and still has to be is that the EU is a system of balance between the big countries and the smaller ones. Without the EU that would not work and Germany would dominate - something nobody wishes.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Culturally, of course. There is only one thing missing to give Europe the identity you ask for - a war, or better a civil war.

War can also break countries, Yugoslavia, Sudan, Austria-Hungary...

Well, the succession of Britain is a wonderful opportunity ...

Jokes aside, nobody in the EU wants to force the English to stay in the EU.

But you'll force the Welsh? If you can't tell the difference then neither of us belong in the EU.

The European Unity stands for freedom, independency, wealth and peace. the fundament is (or should be) humanism.
I work side by side with people from Spain, France and Italy. Some of my neighbours are Poles, Italians, Greek, Turks and so on. It does not matter. We all have a lot in common.

It is supposed to stand for those things but it is not an End in itself, or it should not be. If the EU no longer advances those ideals it should be discarded.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Culturally, of course. There is only one thing missing to give Europe the identity you ask for - a war, or better a civil war.

I once attended a presentation of Google and they showed that they had scanned and investigated billions of documents from all time. They showed on result: up to the American Civil War the name UNITED STAES OF AMERICA was used in plural (the USA are ...). After the CW things changed rapidly and soon it was used in singular (the USA is ...). So I hope you see what I am saying.

Well, the succession of Britain is a wonderful opportunity ...

Jokes aside, nobody in the EU wants to force the English to stay in the EU.

The European Unity stands for freedom, independency, wealth and peace. the fundament is (or should be) humanism.
I work side by side with people from Spain, France and Italy. Some of my neighbours are Poles, Italians, Greek, Turks and so on. It does not matter. We all have a lot in common.

Regarding independency: The English want to gain independency fro EU as far as I understood. Now the British prime minister was the first one to visit Trump, because the Brits desperately need a good agreement with the US, while Trump has only little ambitions to help them. Only benefit would be to weaken the EU. On the other side, the US government asked Germany to negotiate the "unfair" trade conditions between our countries. The German government had to reply that negotiations about trade can only be made with the EU.

For me it seems to be better to be an dependent part of the EU as to be as independent as Britain.

Better explication, thanks.

I'm one of those who misses a bit of our earlier version of federalism, but your point is well taken.