3 ms·

"Which I take to mean replacing with or discussing a fully private model," Why would anyone make that conclusion? "They have surprised on occasion, and not ju

"Which I take to mean replacing with or discussing a fully private model," Why would anyone make that conclusion? "They have surprised on occasion, and not just via their pro Europe stance. " ??? I think you might be misinterpreting what 'neoliberal' is. The EU is their project. The EU started as a business cartel (for reference on that, ironically see Yanis Varoufakis interview on FT podcast), i.e. the 'European Coal and Steel' community. It was a 'Common Market' for decades before any material political integration. It has a 'social' side, but mostly it has business interests: single market economy, single currency, standardized regulatory environment, EU level commercial law, no tariffs, no trade barriers, full capital and labour mobility, a Central Bank, a central 'investment bank' (i.e. EIF). ... now throw in a very weak and unrepresentative democracy, and weakened local governments as a nice bonus. This is a neoliberal wet dream. The Lib Dems, as the closest political body to represent FT types, has always been 'pro EU' because it's their thing. Look at Macron's candidacy for example - this guy came out of thin air to basically take over the Republic with full support of most major papers, and tons of glowing coverage even outside France? Where did this guy magically appear from? The centre of French business community - they tapped him, and worked even with their would-be opponents on many issues (classical leftist press) to go 'full in' on 'anyone but Le Pen'. Now he's the head of the LibDem group in the EU Parliament, which will have the most weight in deciding the EU Presidency. 'Big business' almost always wants 'more EU' for very obvious reasons, unless it grinds them on a particular cause (i.e. some entities in The City may be opposed to losing rights, some fisheries etc.)

NeedMoreTea 7y ago
I'm hardly going to lament - to passionately regret or complain about - something I wish to keep. If I lament socialised medicine it's very unlikely I have socialised medicine as the solution to my passionate complaints and weeping... If I just want to fix clear problem areas I'm not going to lament the whole concept... Not really misinterpreting - the EU was very much a political integration project in 1974 when the UK joined the "common market", it just wasn't marketed to the public as such. For instance a common foreign policy was already mostly in place, as was "ever closer union", which would later become the problem phrase for the Tory party. Heath knew that. It was in all the documents from the very beginning. Many of the restraints of trade and labour focused measures were there from the very start too. Even the preceding Coal and Steel Community was built around merging the democracies.[1] One of the founding aims in the very first signed treaty was to transform Europe step by step to a unified single state. It also had those developing business interests - though the central bank isn't a real central bank of course. So in summary some has been clearly in favour of business, some has clearly not, and it's always been so. I'm not sure how you categorise it as weak democracy either - it has the problems with lobbying that every form of modern democracy has, but that's not uniquely EU. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Coal_and_Steel_Community https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Coal_and_Steel_Commun...

NeedMoreTea 7y ago

I'm hardly going to lament - to passionately regret or complain about - something I wish to keep. If I lament socialised medicine it's very unlikely I have socialised medicine as the solution to my passionate complaints and weeping... If I just want to fix clear problem areas I'm not going to lament the whole concept... Not really misinterpreting - the EU was very much a political integration project in 1974 when the UK joined the "common market", it just wasn't marketed to the public as such. For instance a common foreign policy was already mostly in place, as was "ever closer union", which would later become the problem phrase for the Tory party. Heath knew that. It was in all the documents from the very beginning. Many of the restraints of trade and labour focused measures were there from the very start too. Even the preceding Coal and Steel Community was built around merging the democracies.[1] One of the founding aims in the very first signed treaty was to transform Europe step by step to a unified single state. It also had those developing business interests - though the central bank isn't a real central bank of course. So in summary some has been clearly in favour of business, some has clearly not, and it's always been so. I'm not sure how you categorise it as weak democracy either - it has the problems with lobbying that every form of modern democracy has, but that's not uniquely EU. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Coal_and_Steel_Community https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Coal_and_Steel_Commun...