8 ms·

Often suggested as one of the reasons Europe has experienced its most peaceful period in a thousand years. The EU means we can't afford to go to war with each o

by Veen 10y ago

Often suggested as one of the reasons Europe has experienced its most peaceful period in a thousand years. The EU means we can't afford to go to war with each other. Although some are intent on dismantling that progress, sadly.

nickik 10y ago
The problem is that the EU is far more then that. I support both movement of goods and people, I even support standardization efforts and things like that. However many people want the EU to be far more then that. The EU as a strong central state for Europe. That I do not want, and that's why I am against the EU in its current form, and Im against growth of the EU.
- piva00 10y ago
  Why?
  - nickik 10y ago
    Unspecific question. There are many reasons. We have seen many of the weaknesses of in the last financial crisis. The EU is just horrible set up economically. The Euro as a EU project is the crown achievement of bad economics has been a total and absolut disaster, the biggest since the Inter-War gold standard. There are many other problems, with debt, enforcement of debt collection and so on. The bad EU setup was totally unclear about how debt management worked and all these problem had to be (and jet have to be) solved on a running system, instead of using a good design in the first place. The EU was used often to push bad laws on countries that they had internally rejected, but the people against it could not stop in on European level (Germany Vorratsdatenspeicherung for example). The EU is not democratic enough, both internally and the way it was created. One can of course argue that many of these problems can be solved with more centralization, but that 'solution' has lots of problems by itself also. I would image a EU should be a club that agrees on trade and the movements of goods. There is no reason to handle every single issue under the EU umbrella, I would rather see independent organisation that deal with certain issues. The EU is like a hammer, and every single problem looks like a nail to it.
    - YeGoblynQueenne 10y ago
      >> The EU was used often to push bad laws on countries that they had internally rejected, but the people against it could not stop in on European level (Germany Vorratsdatenspeicherung for example). The EU is not democratic enough, both internally and the way it was created. By the same token you can't stop laws that affect you on the regional level by voting on the national level, or laws that affect you on the community level by voting on the regional level. So what's the solution? Dissolve any union above the community level, so that we can all have our small-town democracies, who can then have a jolly good fight over who shall pick up the garbage? Kind of ... parochial, innit. In any case all that about the EU being undemocratic is just hogwash. MEPs are much more likely to be people from outside the political establishment of their country, which means voting fot he European parliament gives you a much better chance that your vote will represent you rather than give power to established interests that don't give half a bit about you. Plus: Nigel bloody Farage is an MEP. If you call an organisation that allows you to elect people who campaign against it "undemocratic" then I have no idea what you'd call democratic.
      - krona 10y ago
        > In any case all that about the EU being undemocratic is just hogwash. Sorry, People who say 'look, the parliament is elected, therefore the system is democratic' are focusing on the machinations, rather than the demos; it is the demos (the first person plural 'we') which acts as the one thing that permits a group of people to be governed. It cannot be found in the EU parliament, and it cannot be manufactured by tweaking the system. The soviets had elections, too.
        YeGoblynQueenne 10y ago
        >> People who say 'look, the parliament is elected, therefore the system is democratic' Well, those people are not me. I noted that MEPs come from outside the traditional political establishment and that MEPs like Farage, and others, represent views that are also traditionally left out of governance. That's not the "mechanism" in the abstract. It's the actual nitty-gritty of how it all works out in the end. And that's your demos right there- the people, not the elites, or the corporations or whomever. The EU is democratic because it gives people an opportunity to choose its direction. The UK for instance, it chose to get out. The Soviets? There you go- they couldn't vote themselves out of being Soviet. EU citizens can. Still not seeing how it's all so undemocratic.
- gcb0 10y ago
  > I like something as it is > people are proposing to change it > that's why I want to destroy the thing I like see how silly you sound?
  - mercer 10y ago
    - I like something - that something has been achieved but there's been a steady development toward other things that I don't like - that's why I'm not happy with the status quo and (perhaps) I would like things to return or be reduced to that thing I like I don't think that's silly at all, leaving aside my personal view on this.
  - synicalx 10y ago
    Do you see how silly YOU sound? If something you like is changing in such a way that it's no longer something that you like, then why would you want to keep it around?
ocschwar 10y ago
My favorite factoid: the Baby Boomers are the first generation to go from birth to retirement (and I might hope: to death) without witnessing a war along the Rhine. The first, that is, since the death of Charlemagne. The EU has its issues, but its core accomplishment is a singularity.
- nickik 10y ago
  Why is everybody so certain that the EU is the reason for this? Many other things changed in the same time England, France, Germany were no longer the powers they were before. The US and Russia dominated. There were nuclear weapons. The internal politics of many of these nations changed quite a bit as well. Idiotically changes of the people and even the political elites changed. Also the EU has not always been the EU it has now. There were many iterations and those that are against the EU might not be against the general idea of a more united EU but rather against a specific iteration of these contracts. These other visions of the EU might also have prevented war (and they might have in the time they were active).
  - raverbashing 10y ago
    > that are against the EU might not be against the general idea of a more united EU but rather against a specific iteration of these contracts. You're right, but then pushing for leaving or dismantling is cutting off the nose to spite the face
    - nickik 10y ago
      It depends. The questions is about institutional reform and how possible it is. I do not think the current EU will evolve in a good direction. I prefer countries to leave and establish new bilateral treaties along the same lines. Maybe after the EU has failed we can have a new attempted that people will actually get on board with.
      - raverbashing 10y ago
        While I think that the EU should not (and if they try they won't be able to) try and become a "super country" and the bureaucracy can be excessive (but some of it is needed) it's a good idea in principle > I prefer countries to leave and establish new bilateral treaties along the same lines So that they have all the obligations of a member but no say on the discussions?
makomk 10y ago
One has to wonder how well that works if one of the governments turns totalitarian and starts seizing private businesses, as has been happening for the past few months in Turkey. (Turkey makes a large proportion of the lower-end TVs sold in Europe, amongst many other things.)

by Veen 10y ago

nickik 10y ago

The problem is that the EU is far more then that. I support both movement of goods and people, I even support standardization efforts and things like that. However many people want the EU to be far more then that. The EU as a strong central state for Europe. That I do not want, and that's why I am against the EU in its current form, and Im against growth of the EU.

piva00 10y ago
Why?
- nickik 10y ago
  Unspecific question. There are many reasons. We have seen many of the weaknesses of in the last financial crisis. The EU is just horrible set up economically. The Euro as a EU project is the crown achievement of bad economics has been a total and absolut disaster, the biggest since the Inter-War gold standard. There are many other problems, with debt, enforcement of debt collection and so on. The bad EU setup was totally unclear about how debt management worked and all these problem had to be (and jet have to be) solved on a running system, instead of using a good design in the first place. The EU was used often to push bad laws on countries that they had internally rejected, but the people against it could not stop in on European level (Germany Vorratsdatenspeicherung for example). The EU is not democratic enough, both internally and the way it was created. One can of course argue that many of these problems can be solved with more centralization, but that 'solution' has lots of problems by itself also. I would image a EU should be a club that agrees on trade and the movements of goods. There is no reason to handle every single issue under the EU umbrella, I would rather see independent organisation that deal with certain issues. The EU is like a hammer, and every single problem looks like a nail to it.
  - YeGoblynQueenne 10y ago
    >> The EU was used often to push bad laws on countries that they had internally rejected, but the people against it could not stop in on European level (Germany Vorratsdatenspeicherung for example). The EU is not democratic enough, both internally and the way it was created. By the same token you can't stop laws that affect you on the regional level by voting on the national level, or laws that affect you on the community level by voting on the regional level. So what's the solution? Dissolve any union above the community level, so that we can all have our small-town democracies, who can then have a jolly good fight over who shall pick up the garbage? Kind of ... parochial, innit. In any case all that about the EU being undemocratic is just hogwash. MEPs are much more likely to be people from outside the political establishment of their country, which means voting fot he European parliament gives you a much better chance that your vote will represent you rather than give power to established interests that don't give half a bit about you. Plus: Nigel bloody Farage is an MEP. If you call an organisation that allows you to elect people who campaign against it "undemocratic" then I have no idea what you'd call democratic.
    - krona 10y ago
      > In any case all that about the EU being undemocratic is just hogwash. Sorry, People who say 'look, the parliament is elected, therefore the system is democratic' are focusing on the machinations, rather than the demos; it is the demos (the first person plural 'we') which acts as the one thing that permits a group of people to be governed. It cannot be found in the EU parliament, and it cannot be manufactured by tweaking the system. The soviets had elections, too.
      - YeGoblynQueenne 10y ago
        >> People who say 'look, the parliament is elected, therefore the system is democratic' Well, those people are not me. I noted that MEPs come from outside the traditional political establishment and that MEPs like Farage, and others, represent views that are also traditionally left out of governance. That's not the "mechanism" in the abstract. It's the actual nitty-gritty of how it all works out in the end. And that's your demos right there- the people, not the elites, or the corporations or whomever. The EU is democratic because it gives people an opportunity to choose its direction. The UK for instance, it chose to get out. The Soviets? There you go- they couldn't vote themselves out of being Soviet. EU citizens can. Still not seeing how it's all so undemocratic.
gcb0 10y ago
> I like something as it is > people are proposing to change it > that's why I want to destroy the thing I like see how silly you sound?
- mercer 10y ago
  - I like something - that something has been achieved but there's been a steady development toward other things that I don't like - that's why I'm not happy with the status quo and (perhaps) I would like things to return or be reduced to that thing I like I don't think that's silly at all, leaving aside my personal view on this.
- synicalx 10y ago
  Do you see how silly YOU sound? If something you like is changing in such a way that it's no longer something that you like, then why would you want to keep it around?

ocschwar 10y ago

My favorite factoid: the Baby Boomers are the first generation to go from birth to retirement (and I might hope: to death) without witnessing a war along the Rhine. The first, that is, since the death of Charlemagne. The EU has its issues, but its core accomplishment is a singularity.

nickik 10y ago
Why is everybody so certain that the EU is the reason for this? Many other things changed in the same time England, France, Germany were no longer the powers they were before. The US and Russia dominated. There were nuclear weapons. The internal politics of many of these nations changed quite a bit as well. Idiotically changes of the people and even the political elites changed. Also the EU has not always been the EU it has now. There were many iterations and those that are against the EU might not be against the general idea of a more united EU but rather against a specific iteration of these contracts. These other visions of the EU might also have prevented war (and they might have in the time they were active).
- raverbashing 10y ago
  > that are against the EU might not be against the general idea of a more united EU but rather against a specific iteration of these contracts. You're right, but then pushing for leaving or dismantling is cutting off the nose to spite the face
  - nickik 10y ago
    It depends. The questions is about institutional reform and how possible it is. I do not think the current EU will evolve in a good direction. I prefer countries to leave and establish new bilateral treaties along the same lines. Maybe after the EU has failed we can have a new attempted that people will actually get on board with.
    - raverbashing 10y ago
      While I think that the EU should not (and if they try they won't be able to) try and become a "super country" and the bureaucracy can be excessive (but some of it is needed) it's a good idea in principle > I prefer countries to leave and establish new bilateral treaties along the same lines So that they have all the obligations of a member but no say on the discussions?

makomk 10y ago

One has to wonder how well that works if one of the governments turns totalitarian and starts seizing private businesses, as has been happening for the past few months in Turkey. (Turkey makes a large proportion of the lower-end TVs sold in Europe, amongst many other things.)