🇳🇱
@iankenway I thought you were only against a no-deal brexit. Seems they created a deal so was it just any brexit you didnt want or do you not like the deal?
Hi, sorry for my tardiness in responding to your comment but I've been busy this week dealing with refugees on this island.
I think the EU has many problems, but it's my judgment that the UK has many more. I believe that the ideal of cooperation between nations, communities and individuals must always trump the more more base (if natural) desires of competition. It's good to compete up to a point (did I mention the Olympic Games?) but our humanity is best expressed through our capacity for cooperation.
If Britain had decided to leave the EU through a properly planned, forked version of the Norway model, I could have probably accepted that approach, even though it wouldn't have been as good as full EU membership. At least in my opinion!
@iankenway Fair statement, thanks for clarifying. While I am anti-EU myself and pro-trade-union I dont entierly agree but thats more philosophical than on any specific point you may have.
In my opinion leaving with a deal, or no-deal, is only the first step. They just need to get out. Once they do the EU no longer has it int he personal interest to make a shitty deal to force them to stay. After they leave the interests of the EU shift to wanting a deal for their own interests since there is no longer the motivation to force the UK hand in staying. So once they get out, shitty deal or not, I have no doubt a much better deal will form quickly.
My apologies that 48 hours turned into 96+! I’m happy for you to respond to me further about this either on QOTO or privately. I’m also happy if you don’t have the time or are simply disinclined to take the discussion further. No problem.
When you wrote “While I am anti-EU myself and pro-trade-union…” are you implying that the EU seeks to curb trade union membership or collective bargaining with employers? If so, perhaps you could be more specific.
More broadly, I’m also interested in why you describe yourself as “anti-EU”. Do you regard the latter as ‘imperialistic’? Is your main beef the character of its bureaucracy? Or do you simply dislike large institutions and trading blocks, along with multi-lateral trade agreements? If the EU is ‘bad’, then what is your position re NAFTA, CAFTA, ASEAN etc.?
Or, again, is the main issue for you that of federalism? Language aside (though not completely), do people living in Alaska, Montana and New Mexico, say, have more in common than people living in Ireland, Estonia or Greece? Is the Russian Federation or China too big? Should Catalunya or Scotland secede from Spain and the UK respectively? (Or, indeed Chechnya from the RF or Kashmir from India?)
Then there’s the question of the relationship between capitalism and globalism. They are not of course synonymous. If you are a libertarian, can you be a socialist as well (or vice versa)? That seems to be quite an interesting question.
Also, can you really have free trade when it’s not fair trade (and I mean ‘fair’ from a wide variety of perspectives)? Ultimately, are regulatory regimes absolutely essential to ensure that trade is transparently fair? If so, shouldn’t the real debate in this area be about the scope, quality and constituency of those regimes, rather than whether or not those regimes should be required at all?
Just a few questions. Not to provoke, but merely to puzzle over!
@iankenway I do not see the EU as anti-trade union. I see it as something that intended to start as a simple tradeunion but instead devolved into an system of governance and laws. Once it crossed that line it became unwanted, even if it also maintains some advantages of a trade union as well.
It is mostly federalism as a failed form of government. You comparing it to what they do back in the USA will mostly fall on deaf ears to me as I would hold the USA and the UK up as both examples of why federalizing fails a devolves its people into polarized divisive non productive people in terms of their ability to govern. As such I do not want to see tose same qualities take root here in the EU, which seems to be the way things are headed.
Socialism is just redistribution of wealth, liberarians dont belive in large (or sometimes any) government, being anti-federal is not being libertarian. I want localized and smaller government not to eliminate it all together.
I dont consider price fixing or other tactics employed by the EU to be fair trade. That brings s back to trade unions which could potentially produce fair trade, it however is very different than what the EU is doing which is far beyond that.
I don’t want to prolong this thread. We can probably come back to it again.
I would describe my own political position as multi-valent. If I’m a radical, then is driven in part (but only in part) by certain conservative traits – namely that tradition is important, that expertise has value, that scepticism has a role and ‘noblesse oblige’ shouldn’t always be the object of sneer.
From what you have written, it seems that you are a minarchist (no, not a monarchist!); namely that you favour minimal, ‘night watchman’ independent, small states. I genuinely respect this view but wonder if this (a) flies in the face pre-third-millennium history and (b) is currently defensible in a world where the internet has made “geography history”. In short is minarchism the last gasp of political romanticism.
On the question of federalism, federations can obviously take many forms re polity. The literature on this subject is substantial and there are many perspectives. My starting place would probably be here:
https://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/0199245002.001.0001/acprof-9780199245000
On the question of price fixing and fair trade within the EU, I would suggest that first port of call should probably be this:
https://europa.eu/youreurope/business/selling-in-eu/competition-between-businesses/competition-rules-eu/index_en.htm
Ciao for now!
@iankenway The important distinction in my view is a few things:
1) while the legal authority should be ground up, basically with the small regions having the final say on laws, that doesnt mean I am against a federalized power, it just doesnt represent the EU or the USA or the forms you currently see. They would be unions (trade unions) and other agreemens. So for example you can still have a federal educational agency if it is beneficial they just cant impose any laws on the members.
2) The modern era is exactly why I think it is so relevant. I looked at the modern era and its failures which seem to consistently and directly arrize from large federalized structures. The two largest examples of failed governance I know of in the world is the USA and the UK. I derived this from how they and their people behave in modern times.
@iankenway Always happy to chat, it has been an enjoyable discussion.
@freemo Yes, thanks!
@freemo Thank you for your further comments. I think we may have more in common that you suppose! Maybe we can come back to this after the UK GE!