One of the founding principles of the EU has really been to try and avoid a repeat of the world wars that are still (just about) in living memory. In that respe

One of the founding principles of the EU has really been to try and avoid a repeat of the world wars that are still (just about) in living memory. In that respect it's been a wild success, I'm not sure we've ever had such a lasting amount of peace. As someone with a mixed UK / Greek background it's been interesting and often painful seeing the current woes of the EU. Greece has had a lot of problems, many of which really do benefit from outside oversight. I've seen a large amount of corruption there, be it deliberate or just letting things slide. Having input from outside to try and stamp out some of the more rampant stuff is very much a good thing. However this isn't always a good thing, the rise of the far right 'golden dawn' can very much be attributed to old stirrings of anti German sentiment, much of it based on inflammatory second world war tub thumping (although ignoring the fact that many of the particularly right wing areas now were Nazi sympathisers, go figure). The UK has, in contrast, been much more high handed. I think a lot of the Greeks are worried but ultimately they really do want to stay in the EU, where as I'm not sure that's the case in England. There's this air of superiority, both from the colonial past and the nature of the UK as an island that lends itself well to always expecting to be treated specially for some reason. Rather than forever going towards a broader union I can't help wondering if a more hazy framework would work better, rather than having an authority in Brussels/Strasbourg could we not have representatives from sovereign governments that debate these issues when they affect areas larger than countries? Much of the current legislation seems as though it doesn't really need to be done on such a sweeping scale.