Open Letter from a Eurocitizen Living in London: Brits, Vote for Brexit(opendemocracy.net)
opendemocracy.net
Open Letter from a Eurocitizen Living in London: Brits, Vote for Brexit
https://www.opendemocracy.net/can-europe-make-it/koldo-casla/open-letter-from-eurocitizen-living-in-london-brits-vote-for-brexit
7 comments
As someone who spent 20 or more years believing Britain should leave the EEC/EU for the last decade or so I've been an increasingly enthusiastic European. Not because I believe in the institution as such, but because it has become the only real check on our ever more broken democracy.
Dear letter writer, the view from London counts for nothing, you should try a view from the minor colonies (UK outside London and the home counties).
Dear letter writer, the view from London counts for nothing, you should try a view from the minor colonies (UK outside London and the home counties).
I'm on the other side of the pond, but: If London mostly ignores things outside of London, what makes you think Brussels will be more attentive?
I don't think they are more attentive, but the framework currently curbs the more extreme tendencies of our government(s). Most obvious example is the human rights act (ironically the ECHR is not a body of the EU, despite most media and political spin here implying it is), but also includes the restrictions on GM, safety, and generally in the area of social, labour and market regulation.
Yes, the UK has opted out of several parts, but it can't (yet) opt out of everything. There's precious little accountability within the EU, but it does, at least for now, hold a more centerist position.
Also the EU regional development funds have done more for the UK regions than Westminster ever has.
Yes, the UK has opted out of several parts, but it can't (yet) opt out of everything. There's precious little accountability within the EU, but it does, at least for now, hold a more centerist position.
Also the EU regional development funds have done more for the UK regions than Westminster ever has.
Condensed somewhat: "Dear British voters: Give up. Your objectionable government renders you people unwelcome in our club, and I want you out."
Condensed further: "Dear British voters: Screw yourselves. Literally."
Either way, this piece propounds a deeply and unnecessarily divisive opinion. We are not our government, and it saddens me greatly to be reminded that the exclusionist prejudices half the Commons are currently busy whipping up into a frothing idiocy here are just as present on the continent.
Condensed further: "Dear British voters: Screw yourselves. Literally."
Either way, this piece propounds a deeply and unnecessarily divisive opinion. We are not our government, and it saddens me greatly to be reminded that the exclusionist prejudices half the Commons are currently busy whipping up into a frothing idiocy here are just as present on the continent.
The last few paragraphs make it clear it's mostly a satyrical take: the author wouldn't vote for brexit if he were British, because there is nothing to gain for the average guy, and even Farage would end up without the only parliament he managed to get elected to.
But below the satyrical level, there is a point. The British government has long been unpopular in European circles. British politicians insist in interpreting the EU as a trade zone rather than a long-term federalist project, and this is at odd with pretty much everyone else. Also, the EU got too big too fast, and if it is to ever make real progress again, it will have to slim down and lose troublesome countries (UK but also some of the Eastern bloc and maybe Greece). In that sense, Brexit might be a belated step forward for the Union, and it would likely hit only the British themselves (well, maybe some French companies too).
But below the satyrical level, there is a point. The British government has long been unpopular in European circles. British politicians insist in interpreting the EU as a trade zone rather than a long-term federalist project, and this is at odd with pretty much everyone else. Also, the EU got too big too fast, and if it is to ever make real progress again, it will have to slim down and lose troublesome countries (UK but also some of the Eastern bloc and maybe Greece). In that sense, Brexit might be a belated step forward for the Union, and it would likely hit only the British themselves (well, maybe some French companies too).
A trade zone is what the people voted to join, tho'. We didn't sign up for a federal superstate and if that is what the EU was planning all along, they did a bait and switch.
> increasingly interdependent world where European nation-states are decreasingly relevant.
I find this (fairly common) statement pretty opaque. I'd appreciate someone explaining what he means and why it's a good argument.
I find this (fairly common) statement pretty opaque. I'd appreciate someone explaining what he means and why it's a good argument.
My take on it: the EU works by having state surrender part of their national sovereignty, and instead go for a set of commonly-agreed rules.
However, transcontinental treaties like TTIP and its ISDS provision would effectively remove a big chunk of each nation's (and the EU's as a whole) capacity to make decision which could be seen as "business-unfriendly". Additionally, the fact that modern economies are so intertwined make them quite fragile (witness the way the financial crisis crossed oceans), which in turn mean less control by national governments.
However, transcontinental treaties like TTIP and its ISDS provision would effectively remove a big chunk of each nation's (and the EU's as a whole) capacity to make decision which could be seen as "business-unfriendly". Additionally, the fact that modern economies are so intertwined make them quite fragile (witness the way the financial crisis crossed oceans), which in turn mean less control by national governments.
Except France, nobody in Europe has the defence budget to be relevant anywhere in the world. Likewise, there is no appetite for increasing such budgets; but a combination of all of them and the economic muscle they have behind, is mighty enough to be paid attention to. A boycott by this or that market is fairly irrelevant in the global scheme of things, but an EU-wide blockade is an existential threat for a lot of people (including recalcitrant actors like China and Israel).
I'm not sure. But it could be about EU legislation. So called "directives" are actually legally binding and of higher rank than national laws.
Also ask Tsipras if he has any idea what this is about :)
Also ask Tsipras if he has any idea what this is about :)
> special treatment as granted by the other EU member states. It did not adopt the Euro, it does not participate in Schengen, and it can pick and choose from within the areas of security, justice and police cooperation as it pleases
All of the european north is not in the Euro, other countries (e.g bulgaria) are not in Shengen, and every other country has the same options too choose (with consequences). There is nothing special about the UK in the EU, as much as Cameron wants to claim the opposite. Despite political gestures, the UK has no other option than to stay in the EU, the opposite would be inane. As the author himself suggests, if they left, they would soon find themselves wanting back, for purely practical reasons. They are not even a barrier to a closer union, there are other more important issues.
All of the european north is not in the Euro, other countries (e.g bulgaria) are not in Shengen, and every other country has the same options too choose (with consequences). There is nothing special about the UK in the EU, as much as Cameron wants to claim the opposite. Despite political gestures, the UK has no other option than to stay in the EU, the opposite would be inane. As the author himself suggests, if they left, they would soon find themselves wanting back, for purely practical reasons. They are not even a barrier to a closer union, there are other more important issues.
I saw a fair bit of anti-British thinking in the European deputies. I sense France and Germany would be able to go through with a few things that previously they couldn't. It's hard to say if this would actually benefit Europe. It all depends if the UK's contribution to European debates is actually productive.
It's almost certain Britain's trading position would be weakened outside the EU. But I'm unsure if the EU would benefit from Britain's exit. It depends if the UK is blocking things would be positive for the EU, something I've seen no evidence of yet.
It's almost certain Britain's trading position would be weakened outside the EU. But I'm unsure if the EU would benefit from Britain's exit. It depends if the UK is blocking things would be positive for the EU, something I've seen no evidence of yet.
I can't express it better. Please, leave
You've posted many uncivil and unsubstantive comments to Hacker News. Please stop doing this.
How it is saying to UK leave being uncivil?
What you posted adds no information and comes across as the expression of a prejudice.
As I mentioned, you've unfortunately been violating the spirit of this site quite a bit. Please re-read the HN guidelines and post civil and substantive comments only from now on:
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
https://news.ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html
(We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11192140 and marked it off-topic.)
As I mentioned, you've unfortunately been violating the spirit of this site quite a bit. Please re-read the HN guidelines and post civil and substantive comments only from now on:
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
https://news.ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html
(We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11192140 and marked it off-topic.)
The choice is really for British people not Euro mainlanders. The western European nations, particularly the French do not like the UK in the EU.
There's a lot to be gained from being in the EU. As a startup having the possibility to 'passport' into the EU is one of the most magnificent things, one license 28+ countries. This includes banking & finance (FCA) licenses. It is enviable to do this even in the US where 50 separate licenses are needed in some cases.
There's a lot to be gained from being in the EU. As a startup having the possibility to 'passport' into the EU is one of the most magnificent things, one license 28+ countries. This includes banking & finance (FCA) licenses. It is enviable to do this even in the US where 50 separate licenses are needed in some cases.
> the French do not like the UK in the EU
Meh, you should ask French companies like EDF, Bombardier and friends... They don't like the UK in, they love it. No trade barriers, mature and profitable market, no real competitors in traditional industrial sectors anymore... It's almost like printing money.
Meh, you should ask French companies like EDF, Bombardier and friends... They don't like the UK in, they love it. No trade barriers, mature and profitable market, no real competitors in traditional industrial sectors anymore... It's almost like printing money.
I should have clarified, French people don't like the EU. More than half don't want the UK in the EU. In addition CDG infamously vetoed the UKs entry in the days of the EEC.
The differences in culture in Europe divides people, trade unites them so I guess these companies love it.
The differences in culture in Europe divides people, trade unites them so I guess these companies love it.
Those are sweeping generalizations. CDG is long dead. French people don't like the British attitude of constantly keeping one foot out, and certain elites don't like them weakening the traditional future of a federated (French dominated) Europe (which actually turned out German-dominated, but i digress).
If Britain fully engaged in good faith, joining the Euro, losing the special clauses and renouncing their constant fight to abolish cornerstone policies like agricultural subsidies, I don't think anyone would want them out.
If Britain fully engaged in good faith, joining the Euro, losing the special clauses and renouncing their constant fight to abolish cornerstone policies like agricultural subsidies, I don't think anyone would want them out.
Every country wanted something out of the EU other countries may have not agreed to, the French wanted agricultural subsidies. If you have 28 countries in a trade union, you're bound to have disagreements.
The government in the UK was particularly enraged about FTT (Financial Transaction Tax) a couple of years ago & that is what has actually led to this whole referendum thing. Every country is good at its own things and they wouldn't like it if was attacked. Imagine a tax on manufactured exports, Germany would have a fit.
It's not like there are policies in the EU that attempt to reduce trade in financial services such as the tobin tax on financial transactions. Italy enacted the tax and its reduced trade quite considerably.
Every country has it's own fight in the EU, it's not just Britian, France had the subsidies problem, Greece had its bailout problem.. each has had its own. There isn't a reason for Britian to be treated differently.
Sweeping generalisations you say? Have you not asked Frenchmen their opinions of the UK in the EU? There are a couple of firms that have done unbiased polls all over the EU and Frenchmen quite simply do not like the UK in the EU, some things just don't change.
CDG is long dead but he is still relevant as he chimes in with the unchanged opinions.
The government in the UK was particularly enraged about FTT (Financial Transaction Tax) a couple of years ago & that is what has actually led to this whole referendum thing. Every country is good at its own things and they wouldn't like it if was attacked. Imagine a tax on manufactured exports, Germany would have a fit.
It's not like there are policies in the EU that attempt to reduce trade in financial services such as the tobin tax on financial transactions. Italy enacted the tax and its reduced trade quite considerably.
Every country has it's own fight in the EU, it's not just Britian, France had the subsidies problem, Greece had its bailout problem.. each has had its own. There isn't a reason for Britian to be treated differently.
Sweeping generalisations you say? Have you not asked Frenchmen their opinions of the UK in the EU? There are a couple of firms that have done unbiased polls all over the EU and Frenchmen quite simply do not like the UK in the EU, some things just don't change.
CDG is long dead but he is still relevant as he chimes in with the unchanged opinions.
> the French wanted agricultural subsidies
Agricultural policies were planned in 1957 and mostly finalized in 1964, long before the UK even joined. This is what I mean by cornerstone: agriculture, energy, industry, economic development... these were defined at the very beginning with the Treaty of Rome. By constantly attacking them, one undermines the whole setup, and that is unclout from someone who joined much later.
> The government in the UK was particularly enraged about FTT (Financial Transaction Tax) a couple of years ago & that is what has actually led to this whole referendum thing.
You conveniently ignore more than 20 years of sustained attacks by the British press on European legislation on all sorts of issues. UKIP did not start in response to the FTT. The referendum idea started gaining traction around the time Blair won his second mandate, when Brown's position on the Euro looked a bit weak, but had been around ever since Thatcher joined. The actual referendum timetable has been entirely defined by the need for settling disagreements internal to the Conservative Party once they had secured a majority. There is simply no single policy that is responsible for precipitating it.
> It's not like there are policies in the EU that attempt to reduce trade in financial services such as the tobin tax on financial transactions.
These policies were discussed while the UK government went through an acute bout of isolationism. Looking back only a couple of years, Brown's influence over European response to the 2008 crash was widely recognised as huge, and it's a fair bet to say that with him at the negotiating table things would have looked very different.
If you don't engage, they will ignore your needs, simple as.
Agricultural policies were planned in 1957 and mostly finalized in 1964, long before the UK even joined. This is what I mean by cornerstone: agriculture, energy, industry, economic development... these were defined at the very beginning with the Treaty of Rome. By constantly attacking them, one undermines the whole setup, and that is unclout from someone who joined much later.
> The government in the UK was particularly enraged about FTT (Financial Transaction Tax) a couple of years ago & that is what has actually led to this whole referendum thing.
You conveniently ignore more than 20 years of sustained attacks by the British press on European legislation on all sorts of issues. UKIP did not start in response to the FTT. The referendum idea started gaining traction around the time Blair won his second mandate, when Brown's position on the Euro looked a bit weak, but had been around ever since Thatcher joined. The actual referendum timetable has been entirely defined by the need for settling disagreements internal to the Conservative Party once they had secured a majority. There is simply no single policy that is responsible for precipitating it.
> It's not like there are policies in the EU that attempt to reduce trade in financial services such as the tobin tax on financial transactions.
These policies were discussed while the UK government went through an acute bout of isolationism. Looking back only a couple of years, Brown's influence over European response to the 2008 crash was widely recognised as huge, and it's a fair bet to say that with him at the negotiating table things would have looked very different.
If you don't engage, they will ignore your needs, simple as.
Gosh, I have to get up to speed on the various types of sweeping generalizations.
> The choice is really for British people not Euro mainlanders
Perhaps then should be a referendum to ask the "Euro mainlanders" if they want a UK with the privileges they have
> There's a lot to be gained from being in the EU
Yes, but with the same rules than all the other countries, not like now that they cherry pick what they want.
Perhaps then should be a referendum to ask the "Euro mainlanders" if they want a UK with the privileges they have
> There's a lot to be gained from being in the EU
Yes, but with the same rules than all the other countries, not like now that they cherry pick what they want.
> Perhaps then should be a referendum to ask the "Euro mainlanders" if they want a UK with the privileges they have.
The EU mainlander area's elected representatives forged this deal.
The privileges the UK sought like the 'red card' system apply to the whole of the EU.
There's nothing stopping an EU country from getting the same terms on the integration bit, indeed some countries have done that to varying degrees - Switzerland (EEC), Iceland (EEC), Denmark (own currency), Norway (EEC with EU laws) & Sweden (own currency) & Turkey (customs union)
If you're a Spaniard don't you have to worry about Catalonia?
The EU allows states to 'minitiarize' and devolve down once the trivialities of sovereignty and the '3 basics' EEC principles are sorted out
The EU mainlander area's elected representatives forged this deal.
The privileges the UK sought like the 'red card' system apply to the whole of the EU.
There's nothing stopping an EU country from getting the same terms on the integration bit, indeed some countries have done that to varying degrees - Switzerland (EEC), Iceland (EEC), Denmark (own currency), Norway (EEC with EU laws) & Sweden (own currency) & Turkey (customs union)
If you're a Spaniard don't you have to worry about Catalonia?
The EU allows states to 'minitiarize' and devolve down once the trivialities of sovereignty and the '3 basics' EEC principles are sorted out
EU and EEC are different things. I don't think anybody would object to the UK opting for staying in EEC but out of EU proper. After all that's what they want: a trade zone.
There are problems with being in the EEC but not in the EU.
For the 'sovereignty' issue this is the worst as there is no representation in the creation of the laws. That would be even worse than being out of the EU.
Keep in mind Norway pays something like 90% per person of what the UK pays for its EEC membership. One day Brussels will make a law Norwegians don't like and they will be upset about it and won't be able to do anything about it.
A trade zone requires consistent laws among its members too.
For the 'sovereignty' issue this is the worst as there is no representation in the creation of the laws. That would be even worse than being out of the EU.
Keep in mind Norway pays something like 90% per person of what the UK pays for its EEC membership. One day Brussels will make a law Norwegians don't like and they will be upset about it and won't be able to do anything about it.
A trade zone requires consistent laws among its members too.
> EU and EEC are different things. I don't think anybody would object to the UK opting for staying in EEC but out of EU proper. After all that's what they want: a trade zone.
Yes, this is what I wanted to say.
Yes, this is what I wanted to say.
but Norway, Iceland and switzerland are not part of the EU.
Yup No not in the EU but they are in the EEC meaning they have unrestricted trade access to the EU including the 3 freedoms.
I mentioned each of these have a varying degree of integration to the EU. Being in the EU means there is representation of which Switzerland, Norway and Iceland do not have.
This isn't a great situation though as these places effectively enact EU legislation without representation and nearly pay full fees for EU membership (per person).
I mentioned each of these have a varying degree of integration to the EU. Being in the EU means there is representation of which Switzerland, Norway and Iceland do not have.
This isn't a great situation though as these places effectively enact EU legislation without representation and nearly pay full fees for EU membership (per person).
yes that is true
> Perhaps then should be a referendum to ask the "Euro
> mainlanders" if they want a UK with the privileges
> they have
> Yes, but with the same rules than all the other countries
Plenty (if not all) EU countries have negotiated exception to various treaties. It's the nature of these "exceptions" which matter (like the UK wanting a voice in the Euro policy, despite not being part of the Eurozone, and doing everything they can to prevent reforms of their bloated and dangerous banking sector).
Plenty (if not all) EU countries have negotiated exception to various treaties. It's the nature of these "exceptions" which matter (like the UK wanting a voice in the Euro policy, despite not being part of the Eurozone, and doing everything they can to prevent reforms of their bloated and dangerous banking sector).
[deleted]
[deleted]
And I don't see that changing. Due to a combination between structural issues, different interests between North, West, East and South and the crisis-related rise of right-wing populism across many European countries (to various degrees, not every country has turned into Hungary), it's getting worse. And I don't see what's going to change that.
I used to be in favour of an EU "federal state". Now, I'm not so sure. Political union makes sense for countries with similar culture and economic interests. But as it is, I see regional blocks, not political Europe. Maybe dropping the common currency and splitting the EU into "mini-EUs" would be a better approach?