How do we resolve the Brexit mess?

[BrianW]

Because the most sustainable, successful, stable form of government is the nation state.

No foreign superstate is sending my kids to die in a war EVER, not happening.

Laws and decisions of that nature should be taken by a government that is elected by and is accountable to the people.

1. What power do you have? 2. Where did you get it from? 3. In whose interests do you exercise it? 4. To whom are you accountable? 5. How can we get rid of you? (with thanks Tony Benn).

It's a simple question of national sovereignty. That is the objection.

So you don't think the USA is either successful or stable? It is a true union of states, where I don't think the EU will ever be more than a confederacy. There is a distinction.

Any USE Government - if it ever came to that, which it probably won't for two or three generations - would be democratically elected. Anything else is inconceivable because the EU nations would never vote for it. So Tony Benn's conditions would be satisfied.

Nation states have an absolutely shocking record when it comes to starting wars, and the UK is no exception. So, on balance, there is every chance your progeny will be sent to die in a war by the UK. How is that 'better'?

National sovereignty is largely illusory in the modern world. I have no power except to vote once every 5 years in a bent electoral system that makes dictators of the largest minority. The UK has all manner of restraining influences limiting its supposed 'sovereignty'. The latest being the ridiculous Trans-Pacific Trade Partnership with its secret courts. Even Elon Musk has more influence than I do. These interferences are multiplied because we are a small player in a big-player world. Unity is strength, isolation is weakness.

 

[Vic]

We were not a founding member.
...

Seems I did well not to read beyond the first erroneous statement!

 

[Vic]

We never lost sovereignty as a member , no country ever did. No superstate sent anybody to war.

Unless the USA is a superstate...

Or the USSR...

Or Austro-Hungary...

Or the Raj...

(Something else the Romans did for us... a multinational army...)

 

[Hgblue2]

So you don't think the USA is either successful or stable? It is a true union of states, where I don't think the EU will ever be more than a confederacy. There is a distinction.

Any USE Government - if it ever came to that, which it probably won't for two or three generations - would be democratically elected. Anything else is inconceivable because the EU nations would never vote for it. So Tony Benn's conditions would be satisfied.

Nation states have an absolutely shocking record when it comes to starting wars, and the UK is no exception. So, on balance, there is every chance your progeny will be sent to die in a war by the UK. How is that 'better'?

National sovereignty is largely illusory in the modern world. I have no power except to vote once every 5 years in a bent electoral system that makes dictators of the largest minority. The UK has all manner of restraining influences limiting its supposed 'sovereignty'. The latest being the ridiculous Trans-Pacific Trade Partnership with its secret courts. Even Elon Musk has more influence than I do. These interferences are multiplied because we are a small player in a big-player world. Unity is strength, isolation is weakness.

America is a country, Europe is not.

The idea that totally disparate nations, with different cultures, histories, languages, political outlooks, can come together in a cohesive and stable union is insane.

The more you people push for this, the more people will vote for nationalist parties who will defend the nation state.

You are literally empowering the very people you most despise by failing to recognise this reality.

 

[grunge]

Because the most sustainable, successful, stable form of government is the nation state.

No foreign superstate is sending my kids to die in a war EVER, not happening.

Laws and decisions of that nature should be taken by a government that is elected by and is accountable to the people.

1. What power do you have? 2. Where did you get it from? 3. In whose interests do you exercise it? 4. To whom are you accountable? 5. How can we get rid of you? (with thanks Tony Benn).

It's a simple question of national sovereignty. That is the objection.

Its been mentioned a few times but It was never realistically on the cards. and even if it was pushed for ( which it hasn't been and there is no sign there ever will be ) we could have vetoed it.

The EU has a defence pact similar to NATO ( an attack on one is an attack on all ) anyways with pretty much nullifies the need for an EU Army.

 

[BrianW]

America is a country, Europe is not.

The idea that totally disparate nations, with different cultures, histories, languages, political outlooks, can come together in a cohesive and stable union is insane.

The more you people push for this, the more people will vote for nationalist parties who will defend the nation state.

You are literally empowering the very people you most despise by failing to recognise this reality.

I am not actually 'pushing' it. (Apart from anything else, I have no such dictatorial power.)

I am saying that I don't understand the objections to it because I don't. I will add that I find them irrational. We are talking about a long-term establishment of a confederacy with limited powers and maximum subsidiarity. Something that will not form, by the way, in any of our lifetimes. It remains an aspiration until people vote to create it.

I will also add that I utterly despise nationalism in all its forms. Most particularly the vaunting nationalism that is linked to militarism and torchlight parades. This shite gave us two world wars and the deeper it is buried under less hazardous shite (say nuclear waste) the better AFAIAC.

 

[blueparrot]

America is a country, Europe is not.

The idea that totally disparate nations, with different cultures, histories, languages, political outlooks, can come together in a cohesive and stable union is insane.

The more you people push for this, the more people will vote for nationalist parties who will defend the nation state.

You are literally empowering the very people you most despise by failing to recognise this reality.

The EU is a cohesive, stable union and was the whole time we were members.

 

[grunge]

Seems I did well not to read beyond the first erroneous statement!

Why is it erroneous? we were not in the 1st itteration of the EU that was created in 1958 ( European Parliament ), we joined in 1973.

EU countries | European Union

Find out more about EU countries, their government and economy, their role in the EU, use of the euro, membership of the Schengen area or location on the map.

european-union.europa.eu

 

[hampshireblue]

Because the most sustainable, successful, stable form of government is the nation state.

No foreign superstate is sending my kids to die in a war EVER, not happening.

Laws and decisions of that nature should be taken by a government that is elected by and is accountable to the people.

1. What power do you have? 2. Where did you get it from? 3. In whose interests do you exercise it? 4. To whom are you accountable? 5. How can we get rid of you? (with thanks Tony Benn).

It's a simple question of national sovereignty. That is the objection.

I assume you don't have a problem with NATO though? I only ask as there may be a need to do so at some stage to maintain some nation states. There is some talk that Trump may want European boots on the ground should a deal be done with Ukraine. It could be argued that a foreign superstate would be forcing us, albeit indirectly, into that position.

 

[mancity2012_eamo]

America is a country, Europe is not.

The idea that totally disparate nations, with different cultures, histories, languages, political outlooks, can come together in a cohesive and stable union is insane.

The more you people push for this, the more people will vote for nationalist parties who will defend the nation state.

You are literally empowering the very people you most despise by failing to recognise this reality.

Imagine how the colonies felt.