3 ms·

In fact I think EU should take few steps back: the perfect state was before Lisbon treaty, when EU was basically just a free trade zone. Since Lisbon they try t

by mamon 6y ago

In fact I think EU should take few steps back: the perfect state was before Lisbon treaty, when EU was basically just a free trade zone. Since Lisbon they try to make it a single country, with unified policy on international affairs, military, etc, which doesn't make sense.

nix23 6y ago
>EU was basically just a free trade zone Exactly! That's what the EU should be and nothing more.
- M2Ys4U 6y ago
  The EU has never been "just a free trade zone", though. It has always had a political element. To quote a 1963 Court of Justice judgment: "The Community constitutes a new legal order of international law for the benefit of which the states have limited their sovereign rights, albeit within limited fields and the subjects of which comprise not only member states but also their nationals. Independently of the legislation of member states, Community law therefore not only imposes obligations on individuals but is also intended to confer upon them rights which become part of their legal heritage. These rights arise not only where they are expressly granted by the treaty, but also by reason of obligations which the treaty imposes in a clearly defined way upon individuals as well as upon the member states and upon the institutions of the Community. "
  - imtringued 6y ago
    The trade union, although critical to our modern day understanding of the EU, was actually not the primary goal, it was all about politics, primarily about maintaining peaceful diplomatic relationships between countries. It's just that doing business together is one of the more effective means to be friendly to each other.
simias 6y ago
I mean that's the crux of the issue, is the EU just a liberal (in the non-american sense) free-trade zone or is it more that that. I personally would like it to be more, but I understand that it's a very controversial topic.
rbecker 6y ago
Of all the things the EU does, unified international policy makes the most sense to me - only way to avoid getting picked off one by one. It's the attempt at unifying countries internal policies that I don't see the point of.
- mantas 6y ago
  It would make sense, but different countries have way too different historical experience, cultural ties and business interests. Hottest examples - Russia/Belarus/Ukraine, Greece/Turkey, Nordstream, the whole migrants-in-Mediteranean thing and so on.
  - bkor 6y ago
    Differences in culture are addressed by endless amount talking, compromises, etc. Previously Europe often resorted to war. I highly prefer the current attempt at trying to keep peace. Promoting peace is listed as a goal on https://europa.eu/european-union/about-eu/eu-in-brief_en https://europa.eu/european-union/about-eu/eu-in-brief_en
    - mantas 6y ago
      And appeasement for the sake of technical peace is the problem. What if Germany and France decides to go for endless talking and compromises to Russia, giving away parts of eastern europe as part of the deal to keep peace?
glogla 6y ago
I would say it is the only way it makes sense. The world now belongs to huge nations like USA, China and India. The only way European people can survive with their freedom intact is by banding together.
- kzrdude 6y ago
  I think the EU has a very important role to play, like this, but it shouldn't be the case that we have to be an empire to survive - either against other big empires, or mega-corps, both kinds of things have a bit too much power. The mega-corps we can regulate, and (unfortunately) - a powerful EU is needed to do it in this state of the world.
newbie578 6y ago
Fascinating, this is such a hot topic which is going to be debated for decades. I for one think that EU needs to take several steps forward. I personally am for a single country, or how federalists like to say, United States of Europe. It seems to me like the "best case" scenario geopolitically and economically for EU.
- imtringued 6y ago
  I feel so too but the goals that I want the EU to achieve do not necessarily require a single federation. If they find a different method I'll be happy either way.
M2Ys4U 6y ago
The EU has never been "just a free trade zone", though. It has always had a political element. To quote a 1963 Court of Justice judgment: "The Community constitutes a new legal order of international law for the benefit of which the states have limited their sovereign rights, albeit within limited fields and the subjects of which comprise not only member states but also their nationals. Independently of the legislation of member states, Community law therefore not only imposes obligations on individuals but is also intended to confer upon them rights which become part of their legal heritage. These rights arise not only where they are expressly granted by the treaty, but also by reason of obligations which the treaty imposes in a clearly defined way upon individuals as well as upon the member states and upon the institutions of the Community. "

by mamon 6y ago

nix23 6y ago

>EU was basically just a free trade zone Exactly! That's what the EU should be and nothing more.

M2Ys4U 6y ago
The EU has never been "just a free trade zone", though. It has always had a political element. To quote a 1963 Court of Justice judgment: "The Community constitutes a new legal order of international law for the benefit of which the states have limited their sovereign rights, albeit within limited fields and the subjects of which comprise not only member states but also their nationals. Independently of the legislation of member states, Community law therefore not only imposes obligations on individuals but is also intended to confer upon them rights which become part of their legal heritage. These rights arise not only where they are expressly granted by the treaty, but also by reason of obligations which the treaty imposes in a clearly defined way upon individuals as well as upon the member states and upon the institutions of the Community. "
- imtringued 6y ago
  The trade union, although critical to our modern day understanding of the EU, was actually not the primary goal, it was all about politics, primarily about maintaining peaceful diplomatic relationships between countries. It's just that doing business together is one of the more effective means to be friendly to each other.

simias 6y ago

I mean that's the crux of the issue, is the EU just a liberal (in the non-american sense) free-trade zone or is it more that that. I personally would like it to be more, but I understand that it's a very controversial topic.

rbecker 6y ago

Of all the things the EU does, unified international policy makes the most sense to me - only way to avoid getting picked off one by one. It's the attempt at unifying countries internal policies that I don't see the point of.

mantas 6y ago
It would make sense, but different countries have way too different historical experience, cultural ties and business interests. Hottest examples - Russia/Belarus/Ukraine, Greece/Turkey, Nordstream, the whole migrants-in-Mediteranean thing and so on.
- bkor 6y ago
  Differences in culture are addressed by endless amount talking, compromises, etc. Previously Europe often resorted to war. I highly prefer the current attempt at trying to keep peace. Promoting peace is listed as a goal on https://europa.eu/european-union/about-eu/eu-in-brief_en https://europa.eu/european-union/about-eu/eu-in-brief_en
  - mantas 6y ago
    And appeasement for the sake of technical peace is the problem. What if Germany and France decides to go for endless talking and compromises to Russia, giving away parts of eastern europe as part of the deal to keep peace?

glogla 6y ago

I would say it is the only way it makes sense. The world now belongs to huge nations like USA, China and India. The only way European people can survive with their freedom intact is by banding together.

kzrdude 6y ago
I think the EU has a very important role to play, like this, but it shouldn't be the case that we have to be an empire to survive - either against other big empires, or mega-corps, both kinds of things have a bit too much power. The mega-corps we can regulate, and (unfortunately) - a powerful EU is needed to do it in this state of the world.

newbie578 6y ago

Fascinating, this is such a hot topic which is going to be debated for decades. I for one think that EU needs to take several steps forward. I personally am for a single country, or how federalists like to say, United States of Europe. It seems to me like the "best case" scenario geopolitically and economically for EU.

imtringued 6y ago
I feel so too but the goals that I want the EU to achieve do not necessarily require a single federation. If they find a different method I'll be happy either way.

M2Ys4U 6y ago

The EU has never been "just a free trade zone", though. It has always had a political element. To quote a 1963 Court of Justice judgment: "The Community constitutes a new legal order of international law for the benefit of which the states have limited their sovereign rights, albeit within limited fields and the subjects of which comprise not only member states but also their nationals. Independently of the legislation of member states, Community law therefore not only imposes obligations on individuals but is also intended to confer upon them rights which become part of their legal heritage. These rights arise not only where they are expressly granted by the treaty, but also by reason of obligations which the treaty imposes in a clearly defined way upon individuals as well as upon the member states and upon the institutions of the Community. "