I love the EU because...
Discussion
I don't of course, but something a bit surprising about the aftermath of the referendum is the emotional response of some remainers.
For pretty much all my adult life I have been a fairly strident leaver. In speaking and corresponding about the subject I have encountered economic arguments around trade, common regulations and the bargaining power of such a large market. I have encountered some political arguments about it being a counter weight to US hegemony or a safeguard against Russian expansionism. Even a Lib Dems MP who murmured something about promoting democracy and stability, but wouldn't elaborate much.
I always kind of hoped that if we had a referendum that these voices would be heard and a real ideological case for European Union would be made. In the event it didn't happen. We had project fear. We had scorn for aged yokels who fear foreigners. We had some sound economic arguments and some shaky ones. But no fans. No EU patriots. No vehement defence of this great venture or of its achievements. No vision of what a united Europe would look like, stand for or do for its citizens and the world.
That was sad but not altogether surprising. The cause of European federalism is quite niche, even a bit quixotic in this country.
What was a bit surprising was the emotional outpouring after the vote. Suddenly people were marching in the street with EU flags painted on their faces and talking about renouncing citizenship. Paddy Ashdown says that Britain is not his country any more. Some on here, apparently rational and intelligent people say they are embarrassed by the outcome.
That's not something caused by the potential loss of 3% of GDP by 2030, or by not forming part of some abstract counterweight to US hegemony. It’s rage and indignation caused apparently by the removal of something deeply treasured.
So without disparaging Leave voters as thick or reeling off vague predictions of economic harm, what is behind the apparent love of the EU that drives such a response, yet couldn't be articulated during the campaign or even since?
For pretty much all my adult life I have been a fairly strident leaver. In speaking and corresponding about the subject I have encountered economic arguments around trade, common regulations and the bargaining power of such a large market. I have encountered some political arguments about it being a counter weight to US hegemony or a safeguard against Russian expansionism. Even a Lib Dems MP who murmured something about promoting democracy and stability, but wouldn't elaborate much.
I always kind of hoped that if we had a referendum that these voices would be heard and a real ideological case for European Union would be made. In the event it didn't happen. We had project fear. We had scorn for aged yokels who fear foreigners. We had some sound economic arguments and some shaky ones. But no fans. No EU patriots. No vehement defence of this great venture or of its achievements. No vision of what a united Europe would look like, stand for or do for its citizens and the world.
That was sad but not altogether surprising. The cause of European federalism is quite niche, even a bit quixotic in this country.
What was a bit surprising was the emotional outpouring after the vote. Suddenly people were marching in the street with EU flags painted on their faces and talking about renouncing citizenship. Paddy Ashdown says that Britain is not his country any more. Some on here, apparently rational and intelligent people say they are embarrassed by the outcome.
That's not something caused by the potential loss of 3% of GDP by 2030, or by not forming part of some abstract counterweight to US hegemony. It’s rage and indignation caused apparently by the removal of something deeply treasured.
So without disparaging Leave voters as thick or reeling off vague predictions of economic harm, what is behind the apparent love of the EU that drives such a response, yet couldn't be articulated during the campaign or even since?
Disastrous said:
It certainly is but to put the concept into simple terms that you should be able to follow:
Unification is preferable to division, especially in the world we currently live in.
That's something of a philosophy and I suspect lies at the core of the argument. You either agree with that or you don't and I would hazard a guess that a lot of the economics are sideshows to this in the sense that you either see unification as being economically good or bad as a result of your views on the above.
That about covers it for me.
Just good in a general sense? Would world government be even better?Unification is preferable to division, especially in the world we currently live in.
That's something of a philosophy and I suspect lies at the core of the argument. You either agree with that or you don't and I would hazard a guess that a lot of the economics are sideshows to this in the sense that you either see unification as being economically good or bad as a result of your views on the above.
That about covers it for me.
Not trolling and not drinking.
There's loads of stuff about how stupid leave voters are and how poor we'll all be, and only very limited stuff about anything people like about the EU.
I can appreciate the desire for world government and also the acknowledgement that it isn't currently feasible. To me EU government remains unfeasible for the same reasons.
There's loads of stuff about how stupid leave voters are and how poor we'll all be, and only very limited stuff about anything people like about the EU.
I can appreciate the desire for world government and also the acknowledgement that it isn't currently feasible. To me EU government remains unfeasible for the same reasons.
Vocal Minority said:
SKP555 - you have started what is essentially the same thread about 10 times now. Slight deviations on the same ultimate question.
If you want an answer - ok some of the tedious law making was...tedious. I guess its what happens when law is made by lawyers.
But I liked the idea that we were a big community. I liked the idea that we were open and inclusive.
I like the idea I could pop over and see the French - or go and commentate at a 2 day motorsport event in the Czech Republic without needing a permit or visa or whatever.
I found it neighbourly, brotherly, even.
To me, Brexit feels like we're drawing up the draw bridge and staring over the ramparts uneasily at 'them' - suspicious of what they may do to 'us'.
And I don't like that.
I know many, many people differ, and I won't be changing their minds and what is done is done.
But that's just what I think.
I do actually get that.If you want an answer - ok some of the tedious law making was...tedious. I guess its what happens when law is made by lawyers.
But I liked the idea that we were a big community. I liked the idea that we were open and inclusive.
I like the idea I could pop over and see the French - or go and commentate at a 2 day motorsport event in the Czech Republic without needing a permit or visa or whatever.
I found it neighbourly, brotherly, even.
To me, Brexit feels like we're drawing up the draw bridge and staring over the ramparts uneasily at 'them' - suspicious of what they may do to 'us'.
And I don't like that.
I know many, many people differ, and I won't be changing their minds and what is done is done.
But that's just what I think.
Edited by Vocal Minority on Wednesday 22 March 14:51
Do you feel the EU actually lives up to it though?
In some ways I feel that the forced unity creates more division than would be the case in a Europe of independent countries with close cooperation.
munky said:
Why did you choose the word "love"? For most remainers it's a logical decision that weighs the pros against the cons, and finding that for them, the pros outweigh the cons.
If there's an emotional response from some, that still doesn't mean "love". It means that they begrudge certain existing rights likely being taken away by a slim majority that in their opinion are one or more of: insular and inward-looking, nationalistic/xenophobic, under-educated, rural & backward looking, or just old and grumpy. Or, that they consider themselves European before British. I know people that consider themselves to be European citizens, probably because they have lived and worked in continental Europe for many years, with children that are multi-lingual and more "worldly" than (most of) their peers at home who never leave these shores unless it's on a package holiday to Benidorm to eat fish & chips. At the other end of the scale, some people consider themselves to be (for example) Cornish before British. Would we all be better off if the UK was split into individual sovereign counties? I don't know of anyone that seriously thinks so, but some probably do.
For the logical thinkers, the pros and cons have been listed and well discussed already, I am sure. But you're not asking about them.
Yes it's the emotional response I am interested in. As i said it was much stronger than I expected. If there's an emotional response from some, that still doesn't mean "love". It means that they begrudge certain existing rights likely being taken away by a slim majority that in their opinion are one or more of: insular and inward-looking, nationalistic/xenophobic, under-educated, rural & backward looking, or just old and grumpy. Or, that they consider themselves European before British. I know people that consider themselves to be European citizens, probably because they have lived and worked in continental Europe for many years, with children that are multi-lingual and more "worldly" than (most of) their peers at home who never leave these shores unless it's on a package holiday to Benidorm to eat fish & chips. At the other end of the scale, some people consider themselves to be (for example) Cornish before British. Would we all be better off if the UK was split into individual sovereign counties? I don't know of anyone that seriously thinks so, but some probably do.
For the logical thinkers, the pros and cons have been listed and well discussed already, I am sure. But you're not asking about them.
4x4Tyke said:
No it cannot, the economy has suffered and will suffer more, we will all lose rights and security will be diminished to boot. All over an irrational hatred of foreigners.
So is the emotional response, anger and sadness purely a reaction to what you believe to be an irrational decision rather than an actual emotional attachment to the EU itself?Roman Rhodes said:
"Not trolling and not drinking". You don't deny tedious though.
You seem to be positively encouraging the view that leave voters are stupid! I don't agree with that. You are an exception though.
Reading and posting on a thread you find tedious seems pretty stupid to me.You seem to be positively encouraging the view that leave voters are stupid! I don't agree with that. You are an exception though.
Roman Rhodes said:
SKP555 said:
Roman Rhodes said:
"Not trolling and not drinking". You don't deny tedious though.
You seem to be positively encouraging the view that leave voters are stupid! I don't agree with that. You are an exception though.
Reading and posting on a thread you find tedious seems pretty stupid to me.You seem to be positively encouraging the view that leave voters are stupid! I don't agree with that. You are an exception though.
I haven't posted there, and I don't read it.
scherzkeks said:
SKP555 said:
Not trolling and not drinking.
I can appreciate the desire for world government and also the acknowledgement that it isn't currently feasible. .
Why would you want it? Concentration of power tends to be a bad thing. I can appreciate the desire for world government and also the acknowledgement that it isn't currently feasible. .
scherzkeks said:
SKP555 said:
I definitely don't want it. I can appreciate why some people believe in it as a noble goal, and at a stretch why some people believe the EU is a worthwhile step towards it. Though I disagree with both.
I can't. The concept is about as anti-freedom as it is possible to get.battered said:
We can all cherry pick the duds. It's part of being wise after the event. My stockbroker backs duds from time to time, but instead of beating him up for it I look at the overall portfolio return and provided he gets more right than wrong then I let it go.
Or do you believe that all EU funding is wasted on dud projects?
I think it's consistently underperformed for 44 ywars and isn't showing signs of improving. Or do you believe that all EU funding is wasted on dud projects?
battered said:
Sure. 2 easy ones.
1. Raising tax rates should raise tax revenue. However it generally doesn't. (Monetarism, Chapter 1, page 1, pretty well)
2. Borrowing money that you don't have sounds like a bad idea but it can increase growth. (read Keynes for this)
3. If you stop giving £300M a week to the EU you don't get the £300M to spend, because the overall situation has now changed. None of this is zero-sum. (This one's one of mine, borne out by a comment made on the Andrew Marr show. The EU balance sheet doesn't work like the contents of my wallet).
So it goes on. There;s a reason why you can do both first degrees and higher degrees in economics - it's bloody hugely complex. European macroeconomics across the whole continent is staggeringly so. Anyone saying otherwise is either naive, stupid or being obtuse to make a point. Anyone using market stall analogies to analyse continental macroeconomics should stop now and do something simpler, like analyse the whole of fluid dynamics by pouring water out of a jug. It's only water. It's not complicated.
I do have a degree in econimics with a focus on macro and while you're right to an extent you're also putting too much faith in the merits of economics degrees. 1. Raising tax rates should raise tax revenue. However it generally doesn't. (Monetarism, Chapter 1, page 1, pretty well)
2. Borrowing money that you don't have sounds like a bad idea but it can increase growth. (read Keynes for this)
3. If you stop giving £300M a week to the EU you don't get the £300M to spend, because the overall situation has now changed. None of this is zero-sum. (This one's one of mine, borne out by a comment made on the Andrew Marr show. The EU balance sheet doesn't work like the contents of my wallet).
So it goes on. There;s a reason why you can do both first degrees and higher degrees in economics - it's bloody hugely complex. European macroeconomics across the whole continent is staggeringly so. Anyone saying otherwise is either naive, stupid or being obtuse to make a point. Anyone using market stall analogies to analyse continental macroeconomics should stop now and do something simpler, like analyse the whole of fluid dynamics by pouring water out of a jug. It's only water. It's not complicated.
You can make it as complex as you like trying to quantify the costs and benefits of EU membership as compared to various alternative models but you can never hope to get an accurate answer or even test whether the answers you do have are in fact accurate. It's an advanced guessing game with endless shaky assumptions.
Our contribution is known and it's up to the people who make the decision whether or not they feel it's value for money. The government passed that decision to the public and the public said no.
The poll of economists saying they thought it would negatively impact GDP didn't represent years of diligent highly advanced research into the costs and benefits of EU membership, it represented a straw poll of economists asked a fairly strange question with a totally unknown alternative scenario and got a fairly reserved answer from a small number of them.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff