2 ms·
I think the supranational organisations argument is a bad argument to make given that throughout the world everyone else is devolving, and splitting into smalle
by mattmanser 10y ago
I think the supranational organisations argument is a bad argument to make given that throughout the world everyone else is devolving, and splitting into smaller countries or presently trying to split off.
Off the top of my head, countries/peoples recently or actively trying to split or setting up a new regional government, several that are actually in the EU:
Czechoslovakia
Yugoslavia
Catalan
Scotland
Wales
N. Ireland
The Kurds
I'm sure there are many more as I really don't keep up with African or South American politics.
So why is everywhere else in the world seemingly moving to devolution, apart from Europe which is trying to create a super-state out of very, very different peoples.
And I know that they're very different. I'm half-dutch, half-english, my Dad lives in France, I've been to Belgium, Spain, Italy and Germany. Each of these peoples have very different outlooks. And the Germans, quite alarmingly as one of the key leaders of this change, still consider themselves more German than global citizens[1] compared to other countries. And don't misinterpret this, nothing to do with Nazis, everything to do in that they're obviously not doing it out of a love for the EU.
So why the need for the super state? Look at what happened to poor old Spain and Greece being forced into what is now a very disparate economic relationship with Germany, the Germans have even effectively rescinded Greece's national economic decision making.
There don't seem to be any rational arguments coming out of either camp, and of all the arguments, the "supranational organisation" one has got to be the most ridiculous. To make it a quasi-mathematical one is even more absurd as our countries have much better labor laws than America which is bound by exactly that sort of organisation, and we had the bulk of them before the EU was involved. The Social Democracies of the EU came way before the EU even existed, before the EC, before the EEC. Before the EU we certainly didn't have zero-hour contracts, so there's clear evidence his quasi-mathematical arguments don't hold water.
And I say this all as a pro-remain. Posts like this honestly don't help because they are partisan bullshit dressed up as 'logic' with little in the way of facts.
[1] http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-36139904 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-36139904
- rmc 10y agoVery few groups in N. Ireland are trying to set up their own N. Ireland state/government. People either want in with one country or the other.
- mattmanser 10y agoI didn't quite mean that in their case, they've devolved powers from a national level to a regional level, the opposite of what the EU is doing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Ireland_Assembly https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Ireland_Assembly I appreciate it's sensitive and in reality it's a compromise. The Welsh & Scots have have both devolved too though. http://gov.wales/ http://gov.wales/ http://www.parliament.scot/ http://www.parliament.scot/ There's even talk of devolution for the North of England. EDIT: I think this highlights the ridiculous nature of the argument, these countries want to vote on their own future, have self-determination. They're not voting remain for the maastricht treaty's removal of national power, they're all doing exactly the opposite of that at the moment. The main reason the Welsh, Scots + Irish are voting stay is because the EU gives them a lot more money than the London-centric Westminster (and I certainly don't blame them for that!). It's incredibly inconsistent and yet totally understandable.