5 ms·

“Now the catastrophic scenario that many feared has materialized, making the disintegration of the EU practically irreversible” is I think something that people

“Now the catastrophic scenario that many feared has materialized, making the disintegration of the EU practically irreversible” is I think something that people aren't considering enough regarding the recent Brexit vote.

draugadrotten 10y ago
High value words like "Catastrophic", "feared", "disintegration", "irreversible" are all markers that indicates propaganda, not analysis. Cooler heads will prevail.
- foldr 10y ago
  Cooler heads have completely failed to prevail so far. I'm not sure why you think that comment is propaganda. Catastrophic things do happen sometimes.
  - andybak 10y ago
    And even when they don't it doesn't invalidate the warnings. You want to avoid even a small risk of a very big negative outcome.
  - calpaterson 10y ago
    > Cooler heads have completely failed to prevail so far. We are halfway through day 2 of a process that will take many years
- andybak 10y ago
  To understand Soros you need to be aware of his childhood in WWII Hungary: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Soros#Early_life https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Soros#Early_life His attachment to the EU is partly based on his belief that we are too sanguine about Europe's recent past being exceptional and non-repeatable. I don't think this is entirely unreasonable. Some commentators in the 1910's possessed a similar optimism.
  - gadders 10y ago
    His early life in Hungary - you mean helping confiscate the property of his fellow Jews? http://sweetness-light.com/archive/george-soros-on-helping-the-nazis-during-the-holocaust http://sweetness-light.com/archive/george-soros-on-helping-t...
    - nooron 10y ago
      You mean what he did to survive the Holocaust as a literal child? My own grandfather survived survived the holocaust as a child by working in a Nazi munitions plant. My grandmother toiled in Auschwitz. Do you think their ways to survive were immoral too? You don't have to like Soros, but what he did to survive the Shoah is an absurd pretext to dislike him.
      - deleted 10y ago
        [deleted]
  - NetStrikeForce 10y ago
    > I don't think this is entirely unreasonable. Some commentators in the 1910's possessed a similar optimism. It is not entirely unreasonable. It is actually happening: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/nigel-farage-eu-poster-reported-8206561 http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/nigel-farage-eu-poster-... http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/26/racist-incidents-feared-to-be-linked-to-brexit-result-reported-in-england-and-wales http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/26/racist-incid... https://www.facebook.com/sarah.leblanc.718/media_set?set=a.10101369198638985&type=3&pnref=story https://www.facebook.com/sarah.leblanc.718/media_set?set=a.1... This doesn't mean there's a racist majority in the UK, that would be somehow inaccurate. This just means the racists have received validation from political leaders and voters, making them feel enabled to attack foreigners. Next would be UKIP getting in charge of the country because [1] nobody from Conservatives will call article 50, [2] actually the Conservatives have big internal issues and [3] Labour who? Funnily enough, the Lib Dems might be now the only hope for a safe Britain (regardless of its political status towards the EU), which makes me very pessimistic about my future in this beautiful country full of lovely people.
- leonroy 10y ago
  Looking at European history over the past 500 years doesn't bode well for cooler heads. The European Union's main aim was to bring peace to the region. Economic growth and immigration were secondary aims. If the purpose of the union was peace then one can surmise that disintegration of the union will almost certainly lead to a greater probability of conflict. It might take another 50 years but that's often the case with incendiary points in history sparking raging fires many decades down the line.
  - skoczymroczny 10y ago
    Not necessarily. While one of the main goals of EU was bringing peace to the region, it is hard to establish how important it is in bringing peace to the region. Might as well say NATO fills that role good enough, because there hasn't been an armed conflict between two NATO members.
- zyx321 10y ago
  Separatist sentiments are on the rise all over Europe. Unless the good folks in Brussels are willing to seriously rethink their role in shaping international policy, and potentially give up a lot of power, this whole project might very well come apart at the seams.
Someone1234 10y ago
Assuming Brexit actually occurs at all, which is uncertain given Scotland's potential veto.
- sanxiyn 10y ago
  Can Scotland veto? I don't think it can?
  - gadders 10y ago
    It can't. Scottish Law is subordinate to Westminster.
    - Someone1234 10y ago
      In theory. In practice Westminster would have to override devolved powers given to the Scottish Parliament which is a huge "no no." At the moment, Scotland has an effective veto, just because Westminister can change devolved powers doesn't change that fact. So, yes, Scotland has a veto on leaving the EU. It just isn't an iron-clad veto, but by effectively overriding Scotland on this one you're all but assuring Scottish independence. The real question is if Westminister WANTS to leave? If not a Scottish veto might be the political "out" they need.
- leonroy 10y ago
  If Article 50 isn't signed by the Autumn then I believe snap elections in the second half of 2016 or early 2017 will occur with at least one of the major parties campaigning on a Remain platform. Interesting (and troubling) times lie ahead...
drzaiusapelord 10y ago
This seems extremist to me. The reality is that there's a huge convenience with EU benefits, especially the shared currency. The UK never got rid of the pound and was always a body of water away from the rest of Europe. If any member was going to leave, it makes sense that the one least interested in the EU would. I imagine the "new" EU will be Germany-centric now (considering how poorly France, Italy, and Spain are doing) and smaller countries who require German investment, products, etc will not poke the bear with leaving. A more Germanic Europe may or may not be something to worry about. I do suspect that the parts of the EU that aren't economic like its various social regulations are a major turn off and that the EU might reform into a set of economic and monetary treaties instead of this USA-style federal government. I think the EU shows the worst of European leftism and needs reform to accommodate a more diverse political spectrum. The more conservative UK couldn't stomach it any longer, and I certainly applaud their autonomy here. It seems like they were getting the least out of the deal. edit: HN won't let me reply so I'll just edit this comment: Where to start? Its all a complex mess, but EU membership means your country is now beholden to at least the following: EU Charter of Fundamental Rights European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) European Court of Justice (ECJ) The Fundamental Rights Agency (FRA) and that's on top of things like the EU's immigration policies, which was what turned the tide in the UK. edit2: to the guy who wrote "A lot of traditional issues for European left and green movements were enshrined into EU law, and there is no appetite whatsoever to abandon them." Then countries will abandon the EU just like the UK did. I also think you're purposely downplaying the huge loss of autonomy EU membership requires. Allowing a foreign court power over your citizens is a major loss of autonomy, even if you have -some- say in the process that builds that court. Its still not your court or your rules. Its all a terrible consensus of European leftism that differs from your values. Clearly, the UK voters weren't on board with European leftism. Why can't the EU promote a more diverse political spectrum than just the far left?
- Asooka 10y ago
  To nitpick, Republic of Ireland is an EU member and shares a land border with the UK via Northern Ireland. The question of what happens with that border once the UK leaves the EU is still unaddressed AFAIK.
- 10y ago
toyg 10y ago
Because it's a very unrealistic statement, one that is taken seriously only by the Anglo press. Most EU countries do not have governments with a solid mandate to leave (not even Syriza in Greece campaigned on leaving). In fact, most Eu countries do not have governments with a solid mandate at all. France is in turmoil over neoliberal reforms; Italy is in the middle of a constitutional change; Spain just voted and split three ways with little chance to get a majority; and the EU as a whole has bigger fish to fry than localized grievances (refugee crisis, slow economy etc). To be honest, mood on the continent is mostly "good riddance", considering the UK was the most problematic and anti-federalist government of the bunch. That's why there is absolutely no appetite or call for a rethink coming from that side; they'd all very much like for us to trigger art.50 asap and not let the door hit us on the way out.
- leonroy 10y ago
  Considering our military spending is more than 50% that of the next European nation (Germany) I think the EU will certainly miss at least some of the things the UK brought to the table. The EU does have a lot on its plate but in addition to domestic problems it has an unstable Ukraine, Russia eyeing any opportunity to bag a warm water shoreline and on top of that Islamic extremism leading to increasing tension inside and outside Europe. The UK was able to negotiate such advantageous terms with the EU not because of European largesse but because of the many benefits the UK brought to Europe. I can't predict who will suffer more from this, the UK or EU but I very much doubt that the majority of Europeans are glad to see the back of us.
  - oblio 10y ago
    I think that quite a few Europeans have this view about the UK: - if the UK wants mostly to stay on the sidelines and not put skin in the game, then: "Goodbye! Don't let the door hit you on your way out!" - if the UK is fully committed to the EU (which might very likely mean a federal state in the long term), then: "Welcome, you help and support are greatly appreciated!" Basically, Europeans want the UK to buy into the European idea, not just pragmatically adopt it for economic benefits. Of course Europeans aren't stupid, they want economic benefits as well, but this is mostly about a principle. Sort of how the US is about the "American Dream", so the EU wants to forge an "European Dream".

draugadrotten 10y ago

High value words like "Catastrophic", "feared", "disintegration", "irreversible" are all markers that indicates propaganda, not analysis. Cooler heads will prevail.

foldr 10y ago
Cooler heads have completely failed to prevail so far. I'm not sure why you think that comment is propaganda. Catastrophic things do happen sometimes.
- andybak 10y ago
  And even when they don't it doesn't invalidate the warnings. You want to avoid even a small risk of a very big negative outcome.
- calpaterson 10y ago
  > Cooler heads have completely failed to prevail so far. We are halfway through day 2 of a process that will take many years
andybak 10y ago
To understand Soros you need to be aware of his childhood in WWII Hungary: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Soros#Early_life https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Soros#Early_life His attachment to the EU is partly based on his belief that we are too sanguine about Europe's recent past being exceptional and non-repeatable. I don't think this is entirely unreasonable. Some commentators in the 1910's possessed a similar optimism.
- gadders 10y ago
  His early life in Hungary - you mean helping confiscate the property of his fellow Jews? http://sweetness-light.com/archive/george-soros-on-helping-the-nazis-during-the-holocaust http://sweetness-light.com/archive/george-soros-on-helping-t...
  - nooron 10y ago
    You mean what he did to survive the Holocaust as a literal child? My own grandfather survived survived the holocaust as a child by working in a Nazi munitions plant. My grandmother toiled in Auschwitz. Do you think their ways to survive were immoral too? You don't have to like Soros, but what he did to survive the Shoah is an absurd pretext to dislike him.
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
- NetStrikeForce 10y ago
  > I don't think this is entirely unreasonable. Some commentators in the 1910's possessed a similar optimism. It is not entirely unreasonable. It is actually happening: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/nigel-farage-eu-poster-reported-8206561 http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/nigel-farage-eu-poster-... http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/26/racist-incidents-feared-to-be-linked-to-brexit-result-reported-in-england-and-wales http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/26/racist-incid... https://www.facebook.com/sarah.leblanc.718/media_set?set=a.10101369198638985&type=3&pnref=story https://www.facebook.com/sarah.leblanc.718/media_set?set=a.1... This doesn't mean there's a racist majority in the UK, that would be somehow inaccurate. This just means the racists have received validation from political leaders and voters, making them feel enabled to attack foreigners. Next would be UKIP getting in charge of the country because [1] nobody from Conservatives will call article 50, [2] actually the Conservatives have big internal issues and [3] Labour who? Funnily enough, the Lib Dems might be now the only hope for a safe Britain (regardless of its political status towards the EU), which makes me very pessimistic about my future in this beautiful country full of lovely people.
leonroy 10y ago
Looking at European history over the past 500 years doesn't bode well for cooler heads. The European Union's main aim was to bring peace to the region. Economic growth and immigration were secondary aims. If the purpose of the union was peace then one can surmise that disintegration of the union will almost certainly lead to a greater probability of conflict. It might take another 50 years but that's often the case with incendiary points in history sparking raging fires many decades down the line.
- skoczymroczny 10y ago
  Not necessarily. While one of the main goals of EU was bringing peace to the region, it is hard to establish how important it is in bringing peace to the region. Might as well say NATO fills that role good enough, because there hasn't been an armed conflict between two NATO members.
zyx321 10y ago
Separatist sentiments are on the rise all over Europe. Unless the good folks in Brussels are willing to seriously rethink their role in shaping international policy, and potentially give up a lot of power, this whole project might very well come apart at the seams.

Someone1234 10y ago

Assuming Brexit actually occurs at all, which is uncertain given Scotland's potential veto.

sanxiyn 10y ago
Can Scotland veto? I don't think it can?
- gadders 10y ago
  It can't. Scottish Law is subordinate to Westminster.
  - Someone1234 10y ago
    In theory. In practice Westminster would have to override devolved powers given to the Scottish Parliament which is a huge "no no." At the moment, Scotland has an effective veto, just because Westminister can change devolved powers doesn't change that fact. So, yes, Scotland has a veto on leaving the EU. It just isn't an iron-clad veto, but by effectively overriding Scotland on this one you're all but assuring Scottish independence. The real question is if Westminister WANTS to leave? If not a Scottish veto might be the political "out" they need.
leonroy 10y ago
If Article 50 isn't signed by the Autumn then I believe snap elections in the second half of 2016 or early 2017 will occur with at least one of the major parties campaigning on a Remain platform. Interesting (and troubling) times lie ahead...

drzaiusapelord 10y ago

This seems extremist to me. The reality is that there's a huge convenience with EU benefits, especially the shared currency. The UK never got rid of the pound and was always a body of water away from the rest of Europe. If any member was going to leave, it makes sense that the one least interested in the EU would. I imagine the "new" EU will be Germany-centric now (considering how poorly France, Italy, and Spain are doing) and smaller countries who require German investment, products, etc will not poke the bear with leaving. A more Germanic Europe may or may not be something to worry about. I do suspect that the parts of the EU that aren't economic like its various social regulations are a major turn off and that the EU might reform into a set of economic and monetary treaties instead of this USA-style federal government. I think the EU shows the worst of European leftism and needs reform to accommodate a more diverse political spectrum. The more conservative UK couldn't stomach it any longer, and I certainly applaud their autonomy here. It seems like they were getting the least out of the deal. edit: HN won't let me reply so I'll just edit this comment: Where to start? Its all a complex mess, but EU membership means your country is now beholden to at least the following: EU Charter of Fundamental Rights European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) European Court of Justice (ECJ) The Fundamental Rights Agency (FRA) and that's on top of things like the EU's immigration policies, which was what turned the tide in the UK. edit2: to the guy who wrote "A lot of traditional issues for European left and green movements were enshrined into EU law, and there is no appetite whatsoever to abandon them." Then countries will abandon the EU just like the UK did. I also think you're purposely downplaying the huge loss of autonomy EU membership requires. Allowing a foreign court power over your citizens is a major loss of autonomy, even if you have -some- say in the process that builds that court. Its still not your court or your rules. Its all a terrible consensus of European leftism that differs from your values. Clearly, the UK voters weren't on board with European leftism. Why can't the EU promote a more diverse political spectrum than just the far left?

Asooka 10y ago
To nitpick, Republic of Ireland is an EU member and shares a land border with the UK via Northern Ireland. The question of what happens with that border once the UK leaves the EU is still unaddressed AFAIK.
10y ago

toyg 10y ago

Because it's a very unrealistic statement, one that is taken seriously only by the Anglo press. Most EU countries do not have governments with a solid mandate to leave (not even Syriza in Greece campaigned on leaving). In fact, most Eu countries do not have governments with a solid mandate at all. France is in turmoil over neoliberal reforms; Italy is in the middle of a constitutional change; Spain just voted and split three ways with little chance to get a majority; and the EU as a whole has bigger fish to fry than localized grievances (refugee crisis, slow economy etc). To be honest, mood on the continent is mostly "good riddance", considering the UK was the most problematic and anti-federalist government of the bunch. That's why there is absolutely no appetite or call for a rethink coming from that side; they'd all very much like for us to trigger art.50 asap and not let the door hit us on the way out.

leonroy 10y ago
Considering our military spending is more than 50% that of the next European nation (Germany) I think the EU will certainly miss at least some of the things the UK brought to the table. The EU does have a lot on its plate but in addition to domestic problems it has an unstable Ukraine, Russia eyeing any opportunity to bag a warm water shoreline and on top of that Islamic extremism leading to increasing tension inside and outside Europe. The UK was able to negotiate such advantageous terms with the EU not because of European largesse but because of the many benefits the UK brought to Europe. I can't predict who will suffer more from this, the UK or EU but I very much doubt that the majority of Europeans are glad to see the back of us.
- oblio 10y ago
  I think that quite a few Europeans have this view about the UK: - if the UK wants mostly to stay on the sidelines and not put skin in the game, then: "Goodbye! Don't let the door hit you on your way out!" - if the UK is fully committed to the EU (which might very likely mean a federal state in the long term), then: "Welcome, you help and support are greatly appreciated!" Basically, Europeans want the UK to buy into the European idea, not just pragmatically adopt it for economic benefits. Of course Europeans aren't stupid, they want economic benefits as well, but this is mostly about a principle. Sort of how the US is about the "American Dream", so the EU wants to forge an "European Dream".