this post was submitted on 26 Oct 2024
157 points (98.2% liked)

Europe

1426 readers
422 users here now

News and information from Europe πŸ‡ͺπŸ‡Ί

(Current banner: La Mancha, Spain. Feel free to post submissions for banner images.)

Rules (2024-08-30)

  1. This is an English-language community. Comments should be in English. Posts can link to non-English news sources when providing a full-text translation in the post description. Automated translations are fine, as long as they don't overly distort the content.
  2. No links to misinformation or commercial advertising. When you post outdated/historic articles, add the year of publication to the post title. Infographics must include a source and a year of creation; if possible, also provide a link to the source.
  3. Be kind to each other, and argue in good faith. Don't post direct insults nor disrespectful and condescending comments. Don't troll nor incite hatred. Don't look for novel argumentation strategies at Wikipedia's List of fallacies.
  4. No bigotry, sexism, racism, antisemitism, dehumanization of minorities, or glorification of National Socialism.
  5. Be the signal, not the noise: Strive to post insightful comments. Add "/s" when you're being sarcastic (and don't use it to break rule no. 3).
  6. If you link to paywalled information, please provide also a link to a freely available archived version. Alternatively, try to find a different source.
  7. Light-hearted content, memes, and posts about your European everyday belong in [email protected]. (They're cool, you should subscribe there too!)
  8. Don't evade bans. If we notice ban evasion, that will result in a permanent ban for all the accounts we can associate with you.
  9. No posts linking to speculative reporting about ongoing events with unclear backgrounds. Please wait at least 12 hours. (E.g., do not post breathless reporting on an ongoing terror attack.)

(This list may get expanded when necessary.)

We will use some leeway to decide whether to remove a comment.

If need be, there are also bans: 3 days for lighter offenses, 14 days for bigger offenses, and permanent bans for people who don't show any willingness to participate productively. If we think the ban reason is obvious, we may not specifically write to you.

If you want to protest a removal or ban, feel free to write privately to the mods: @[email protected], @[email protected], or @[email protected].

founded 4 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 9 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Would it really be that great for the EU, though? After all, the UK was never particularly fond of the European idea generally and further integration (i.e. federalization) in particular, to put it mildly. My biggest fear is the UK might go back blocking just about anything that goes beyond simple trade deals.

So, imho, the EU would be better off it the UK simply rejoined the common market, but not the political union. We have more than enough dissent, as is.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

Yes, it would. Both benefit from it. That's why the UK and EU are (mostly silently and in the background) getting closer again, and why a number of EU politicians are making remarks like this.

And the UK didn't block everything other than trade deals. In fact the UK didn't really block much at all if you look into it.

They didn't use their veto more than other large economies, and the likes of Poland and Hungary blocked more. And let's not get into the Netherlands, Ireland, and others blocking attempts at closing tax loopholes.

It's not like the EU has seen massive structural changes since it was "unshackled" from the UK, is it?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

Tbf, I couldn't find a source for the UK's voting behavior (and I was being a bit hyperbole). And it's true tht we haven't really seen any reforms since then. The EU has many different countries that want different things at times and some (including mine) are incredibly apathetic.

But that is actually the reason why I do not want the UK to rejoin. Structural reforms are incredibly slow and hard as is. Let's take a common European army for example; afaik a majority would be in favor of it. A member of the European parliament that I once talked with also talked about widespread support within the official bodies of the union. And still, things are slow, though not stagnant; i.e. Germany and the Netherlands have begun integrating their armies into ond.

And all of what has changed i this regard, happened after Brexit (or the referendum, anyway). The UK never had to block votes, because with the UK, any attempts towards a common European army would have been struck down long before anybody got to vote on it. Heck, Eurosceptics loved to use ideas like these to paint Brussels as the boogeyman.

So I'm still not convinced that a full rejoin would offer significant advantages over a Norway type of deal for the EU.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

Of course it would offer something significant. Like it or not, the UK is the second largest economy in Europe, likely has more soft power worldwide than any other EU country, has some of the world's best scientific institutions, etc.

Even just the UK's contribution to the EU budget would be a huge positive.

And of course there are massive benefits for the UK as well - way easier trade, not having to duplicate a lot of EU laws creating needless bureaucracy, slowing of the UK's gradual decline on the world stage as the Asian economies becomes more prominent, etc.

If it offered nothing then we wouldn't have numerous EU politicians making comments like this very article details, no?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

Oops, I missed a few words in my last paragraph. My bad.

I agree that the larger market and membership fees would be beneficial to the EU (though it doesn't need it even half as much as the UK needs access to the market).

Both of these things, however, would also be achieved if the UK only joined the EEA instead of the EU itself (=what i was trying to say in my last comment). Like Norway or Iceland, the UK would retain (more?) control over some areas, including farming and fishing, but would have no say on EU internals.

And since the internal affairs are complicated enough without the UK, I don't see how minor benefits could outweigh its general stance towards Europe and further integration (which, imho, is needed direlly)

To be honest, I even have doubts about the UKs soft power post Brexit; in my perception, it has decreased drastically since the referendum.

Edit: I am in complete agreement on your points about benefits for the UK. Heck, from the UK's perspective, full membership would probably be best. I just don't think it would be in the best interest of the union.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 days ago (1 children)

You keep saying this, yet multiple EU politicians keep expressing a desire for the UK to be in the union.

Like I say, the massive boost to the EU budget alone would make it worthwhile. Nevermind the other stuff.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

I repeated myself because I thought you overlooked some of my arguments or that I didn't express myself clearly. But no, you simply chose to ignore half my arguments three times in a row. Nice!

Do you have something to counter my points on EEA vs EU membership, or is "You keep saying this…" all you could come up with?

… yet multiple EU politicians keep expressing a desire for the UK to be in the union.

If that's a sound argument, then surely Brexit was a splendid idea, too – after all, multiple politicians expressed a desire for it!

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

I already had. EEA membership wouldn't entail the massive EU budget contributions, for example. Not would you get as much benefit from the UK's soft power, or as intertwined an economy.

I didn't ignore it three times. I ignored it zero times. It was a point already addressed before you even brought it up in the first place.

It's you who hasn't presented any evidence that EEA would actually be better (and seemingly, the EU disagrees with you btw). All you did was lie and say the UK blocked a lot of stuff when they absolutely didn't.

If that's a sound argument, then surely Brexit was a splendid idea, too – after all, multiple politicians expressed a desire for it!

False equivelance.

Brexit was pushed by political opportunists like Farage and Boris, who saw it as a path to power. Boris famously had a letter in support of Remain and a letter in favour of Leave, before deciding that backing Leave would be the best path to becoming PM.

High up EU politicians aren't doing this because they think it'll somehow make them the head of the EU commission or something, they're doing it because it's in the interest of the EU.