4 ms·

> Leaving the EU must be seen to have its consequences; political, economical and otherwise. This is the reason why I despise politics, states and superstates,

> Leaving the EU must be seen to have its consequences; political, economical and otherwise. This is the reason why I despise politics, states and superstates, and am leaning to the anarchist side. No, it absolutely makes sense to make a deal that is good for both sides. These are people and their lives you're playing with. The EU 'sending a message' by fucking UK over with its political/economical might is a mafia move, straight out of Putin's playbook, and the EU told us it was different. I am very disappointed and probably won't trust the EU ever again (that's been ongoing since the Lisboa agreement, though). (Am EU citizen)

burmanm 6y ago
You forgot so soon that the EU did not start this process? UK was given opportunities, they did not want them.
- TomMarius 6y ago
  That does not matter. It is known from the T=0 that the EU will do everything to make the UK as bad deal as possible. They're boasting with it just like the GP, saying things like "leaving the EU must not go unpunished", "they must pay for leaving" etc.
  - growlist 6y ago
    Downvotes for stating the truth. Sad.
jnurmine 6y ago
Well, the EU tried pretty hard to negotiate a deal, but as you know the negotiations didn't really go anywhere. The EU cannot force Great Britain to do a deal. That is not feasible. And it is just absolutely unrealistic to even entertain the possibility that the EU would suddenly roll out the red carpet with fanfares for a nation which so clearly wants to leave the union. It's the choice of Great Britain to do what they want, but the nation, through its leaders and its voting population have to accept the consequences of their actions. One cannot leave the EU and simultaneously get the benefits of being in the EU. That is not possible. Consider: if the EU were to hand out the best trade deals and market accesses and free movement and whatnot to every nation wanting to exit the union (for whatever reason), the whole EU would be rendered meaningless and it would collapse. A divided Europe would be a weak one. It would probably end up in a war, most likely not from within, but because of actors using that exact playbook you are referring to.
- TomMarius 6y ago
  Except of course if you are Norway or Switzerland or... > whole EU would be rendered meaningless No, the whole EU project would finally be true to its words, and I don't see freedom as meaningless. > divided Europe Well the EU should stop dividing it then - instead of supporting freedom of trade and movement and work, regardless of politics and ideology, as they told us, they do the exact opposite, using mafia practices to get their way.
  - jnurmine 6y ago
    I'm not sure I follow. What do Norway and Switzerland have to do with anything? Norway and Switzerland have never been a part of EU, so they have never left EU either. Their situation is in no way comparable to Great Britain, which was/is a member of the EU. > freedom as meaningless I'm not sure I understand this either. Is your argument that dismantling of EU leads to freedom? If so, in what way? What freedom do you not have now that EU has taken away from you? > divided Europe In what way does EU divide Europe? Claiming that EU does not support freedom of trade, movement and work is bizarre. Those are the principles at the core of the EU. And of course a country has to, first and foremost, be a part of the EU to have access to EU rights, like free movement in the EU area and so on. > Mafia practises Care to give a concrete example of this? The continuous refusals by Great Britain to negotiate in a meaningful way (give some, get some) is not exactly "mafia practises" from the EU's side. Furthermore, my experience is that many people don't seem to understand even the basics of what the EU is and what it does and has done and why it even exists. And they don't seem to want to find out either -- those people are content with suspect, often state-sponsored sources, feeding them easy but false narrative along with some meme pictures. For example, according to polls, some Serbians believe that Russia and China have sent more aid to Serbia than EU. Ergo: EU bad, Russia/China good. But actually, the truth is that EU has sent by far the most amount of aid. China ranks in the 15th place and Russia even lower. EU had given 3.6 billion EUR in the past 18 years as pre-accession aid. But this is a fact which isn't given to you when you "Question More". Also, earlier during the EU elections there was so much talk about "undemocratic process" and "undemocratic EU" with "behind the scenes scheming by Juncker" and whatever. I found it personally sad, since criticizing something without understanding even a small part of it is prejudice, nothing more. There was a lack of basic knowledge about how the EU institutions like the EU Parliament, EU Commission and EU Council relate to each other, and what was being voted, and how.

burmanm 6y ago

You forgot so soon that the EU did not start this process? UK was given opportunities, they did not want them.

TomMarius 6y ago
That does not matter. It is known from the T=0 that the EU will do everything to make the UK as bad deal as possible. They're boasting with it just like the GP, saying things like "leaving the EU must not go unpunished", "they must pay for leaving" etc.
- growlist 6y ago
  Downvotes for stating the truth. Sad.

jnurmine 6y ago

Well, the EU tried pretty hard to negotiate a deal, but as you know the negotiations didn't really go anywhere. The EU cannot force Great Britain to do a deal. That is not feasible. And it is just absolutely unrealistic to even entertain the possibility that the EU would suddenly roll out the red carpet with fanfares for a nation which so clearly wants to leave the union. It's the choice of Great Britain to do what they want, but the nation, through its leaders and its voting population have to accept the consequences of their actions. One cannot leave the EU and simultaneously get the benefits of being in the EU. That is not possible. Consider: if the EU were to hand out the best trade deals and market accesses and free movement and whatnot to every nation wanting to exit the union (for whatever reason), the whole EU would be rendered meaningless and it would collapse. A divided Europe would be a weak one. It would probably end up in a war, most likely not from within, but because of actors using that exact playbook you are referring to.

TomMarius 6y ago
Except of course if you are Norway or Switzerland or... > whole EU would be rendered meaningless No, the whole EU project would finally be true to its words, and I don't see freedom as meaningless. > divided Europe Well the EU should stop dividing it then - instead of supporting freedom of trade and movement and work, regardless of politics and ideology, as they told us, they do the exact opposite, using mafia practices to get their way.
- jnurmine 6y ago
  I'm not sure I follow. What do Norway and Switzerland have to do with anything? Norway and Switzerland have never been a part of EU, so they have never left EU either. Their situation is in no way comparable to Great Britain, which was/is a member of the EU. > freedom as meaningless I'm not sure I understand this either. Is your argument that dismantling of EU leads to freedom? If so, in what way? What freedom do you not have now that EU has taken away from you? > divided Europe In what way does EU divide Europe? Claiming that EU does not support freedom of trade, movement and work is bizarre. Those are the principles at the core of the EU. And of course a country has to, first and foremost, be a part of the EU to have access to EU rights, like free movement in the EU area and so on. > Mafia practises Care to give a concrete example of this? The continuous refusals by Great Britain to negotiate in a meaningful way (give some, get some) is not exactly "mafia practises" from the EU's side. Furthermore, my experience is that many people don't seem to understand even the basics of what the EU is and what it does and has done and why it even exists. And they don't seem to want to find out either -- those people are content with suspect, often state-sponsored sources, feeding them easy but false narrative along with some meme pictures. For example, according to polls, some Serbians believe that Russia and China have sent more aid to Serbia than EU. Ergo: EU bad, Russia/China good. But actually, the truth is that EU has sent by far the most amount of aid. China ranks in the 15th place and Russia even lower. EU had given 3.6 billion EUR in the past 18 years as pre-accession aid. But this is a fact which isn't given to you when you "Question More". Also, earlier during the EU elections there was so much talk about "undemocratic process" and "undemocratic EU" with "behind the scenes scheming by Juncker" and whatever. I found it personally sad, since criticizing something without understanding even a small part of it is prejudice, nothing more. There was a lack of basic knowledge about how the EU institutions like the EU Parliament, EU Commission and EU Council relate to each other, and what was being voted, and how.