3 ms·

It makes no sense for relations between countries to be structured as an exclusive "club". This just retards progress and leads to stagnation when it becomes im

It makes no sense for relations between countries to be structured as an exclusive "club". This just retards progress and leads to stagnation when it becomes impossible to get all the members of the "club" to agree.

epistasis 10y ago
It makes every bit of sense. When governments differ, the laws differ, and the free exchange of research money is slowed. When you're in the same "club" you can be assured of how things will go. When a country decides that it wants to leave the club because they want to have their own rules that are different, and that they don't want to share finances, then that makes agreements take longer.
- sievebrain 10y ago
  Free exchange of research money has no requirement to be connected to immigration or trade policy, these are unrelated things. Countries can easily collaborate on research without something like the EU, as evidenced by the number of CS papers I read that are for example USA/Israeli collaborations. The EU is failing because its blind, ideological insistence on connecting lots of unrelated things together to make an artificial club (really: the beginnings of a new country). The EU's petulant "retaliation" is treated by far too many as a given, when in reality it is a policy choice driven by a quasi-religious devotion to an abstract vision.
scott_s 10y ago
It's been an organizing practice for states for a long time. On the loose end, you have treaty organizations, and on the strict end, you have states mutually agreeing to cede power to a federal authority. The EU was somewhere in the middle.
tobltobs 10y ago
Don't tell this the Scotts ...
- sievebrain 10y ago
  The UK is not a club and has clear power structures that mean there is no need to get Scotland to agree to things in order for them to happen, as evidenced by the referendum.
  - throwaway-hn123 10y ago
    Not for much longer. I guess then it'll be petulant Scotland punishing the UK?
  - tremon 10y ago
    It's sad how people use this line of reasoning to attack the EU, but see no problems using the exact same thing when defending the current UK structure.
    - sievebrain 10y ago
      It wasn't a defence, it was just an explanation.

epistasis 10y ago

It makes every bit of sense. When governments differ, the laws differ, and the free exchange of research money is slowed. When you're in the same "club" you can be assured of how things will go. When a country decides that it wants to leave the club because they want to have their own rules that are different, and that they don't want to share finances, then that makes agreements take longer.

sievebrain 10y ago
Free exchange of research money has no requirement to be connected to immigration or trade policy, these are unrelated things. Countries can easily collaborate on research without something like the EU, as evidenced by the number of CS papers I read that are for example USA/Israeli collaborations. The EU is failing because its blind, ideological insistence on connecting lots of unrelated things together to make an artificial club (really: the beginnings of a new country). The EU's petulant "retaliation" is treated by far too many as a given, when in reality it is a policy choice driven by a quasi-religious devotion to an abstract vision.

scott_s 10y ago

It's been an organizing practice for states for a long time. On the loose end, you have treaty organizations, and on the strict end, you have states mutually agreeing to cede power to a federal authority. The EU was somewhere in the middle.

tobltobs 10y ago

Don't tell this the Scotts ...

sievebrain 10y ago
The UK is not a club and has clear power structures that mean there is no need to get Scotland to agree to things in order for them to happen, as evidenced by the referendum.
- throwaway-hn123 10y ago
  Not for much longer. I guess then it'll be petulant Scotland punishing the UK?
- tremon 10y ago
  It's sad how people use this line of reasoning to attack the EU, but see no problems using the exact same thing when defending the current UK structure.
  - sievebrain 10y ago
    It wasn't a defence, it was just an explanation.