3 ms·
That's not a second referendum, it's a fundamentally different one because the EEC is not the EU. If there had been a vote to join the EU (and on the other chan
by flukus 8y ago
That's not a second referendum, it's a fundamentally different one because the EEC is not the EU. If there had been a vote to join the EU (and on the other changes since) then it would have a lot more legitimacy and this mess probably would not exist, one way or the other.
- notahacker 8y agoThere's a different name to the organization and a different cohort of voters, and certainly there was a case for offering voters a chance to ratify or reject Maastricht and Lisbon treaties (which may or may not have reduced the mess). But the EU fundamentally is what the EEC set out to be in 1957, far more clearly than the current Brexit options resemble the various 2016 pledges about a post-Brexit UK's aims resemble the respective deal and no-deal options actually on the table. Free movement of workers and capital, common policies in agriculture etc, a European Investment Bank and Social Fund redistributing member states' tax revenues, legislative oversight, a European Council, Commission and Parliament are all in the original Treaty of Rome. The EEC was smaller then, of course, but it didn't hide its intent to invite more countries to join. And the UK completely avoided participating novel EU projects like the Euro that voters clearly didn't want.