The UK Referendum on Membership of the European Union

[Kainesia]

I don't see any reason why it would be negatively changed in any meaningful way. In the even that we leave I am quite sure an agreement will be made over those already in other countries to do with residency. That is just common sense and in the interest of both sides.

There are times when the Leave campaign's argument over potentially problematic areas boils down to a Panglossian 'everything will work out for the best in the best of all possible worlds'; it's predicated on simply brushing aside concerns by asserting that it's 'common sense' that the rest of the EU will reach a gentlemanly accommodation with the UK, so why worry?

The extent to which this often mirrors the SNP's position in the independence referendum doesn't escape me.

To be fair though, the UK is a significantly stronger economy than Scotland alone. They would have been in serious shit when the oil price slumped for instance, but the UK on the whole has a very diverse economy less prone to the risks that the Scottish economy would have faced. That and being run by the SNP which has racked up one of the biggest proportional deficits in Europe.

[Socialist Czechia]

They will, because these people will no longer have the legal right to be there, since they're no longer EU citizens and no longer have free movement rights.
Do you not understand how petty visa systems are?

It's not actually about the movement, it's about residency, which they have the right to do at the moment because of free movement.
What if their visa application is rejected?

EU could start and end with such free movement and free trade, without any further integration - no offices in Strasbourg, no offices in Brussels. With no silly attempt to create anything centralized and united.

Any 'United States of Europe' concept is pure fiction, which won't be possible even under best circumstances. And there are no best circumstances.

Perhaps 200 or 300 years without slaughtering each other...maybe. But that's not possible. Historical animosities, historical trends, political ideologies and human nature prevents that.

[Vassenor]

Which is probably why no-one is actually pushing for that idea.

[Teemant]

They will, because these people will no longer have the legal right to be there, since they're no longer EU citizens and no longer have free movement rights.
Do you not understand how petty visa systems are?

It's not actually about the movement, it's about residency, which they have the right to do at the moment because of free movement.
What if their visa application is rejected?

EU could start and end with such free movement and free trade, without any further integration - no offices in Strasbourg, no offices in Brussels. With no silly attempt to create anything centralized and united.

Any 'United States of Europe' concept is pure fiction, which won't be possible even under best circumstances. And there are no best circumstances.

Perhaps 200 or 300 years without slaughtering each other...maybe. But that's not possible. Historical animosities, historical trends, political ideologies and human nature prevents that.

Free trade needs regulations to make sure that there is an even playing field among members of the free trade agreement. This means tons of regulations and the bureaucracy starts to add up.

[Socialist Czechia]

Only thing which still makes Europe relatively peaceful, is still threat of total atomic annihilation. Nothing changed about that. Not UN, not EU, not OECD. Warheads, therefore impossible price to pay.

For now.

So I really see no point of EU's existence except desperate attempt to have facade of importance by few fallen empires, no longer relevant on world's stage.

Or does India or China care what lonely Britain or France thinks? They don't give two flying f*cks about them already, imagine that without EU.

[Imperializt Russia]

Only thing which still makes Europe relatively peaceful, is still threat of total atomic annihilation. Nothing changed about that. Not UN, not EU, not OECD. Warheads, therefore impossible price to pay.

Nnnnno, that's not it.

It's what keeps Russia vaguely peaceful with Europe, but it's not what keeps Europe peaceful. Primarily because only two European countries have their own nuclear weapons (and five others have ones loaned by and ostensibly controlled by the US), and none of those weapons are pointed at the other European states, unless we count Russia as "European".

[Socialist Czechia]

Free trade needs regulations to make sure that there is an even playing field among members of the free trade agreement. This means tons of regulations and the bureaucracy starts to add up.

European Free Trade Association don't need that.

[Teemant]

Free trade needs regulations to make sure that there is an even playing field among members of the free trade agreement. This means tons of regulations and the bureaucracy starts to add up.

European Free Trade Association don't need that.

I mixed it up with single market. My bad.

[Socialist Czechia]

Only thing which still makes Europe relatively peaceful, is still threat of total atomic annihilation. Nothing changed about that. Not UN, not EU, not OECD. Warheads, therefore impossible price to pay.

Nnnnno, that's not it.

It's what keeps Russia vaguely peaceful with Europe, but it's not what keeps Europe peaceful. Primarily because only two European countries have their own nuclear weapons (and five others have ones loaned by and ostensibly controlled by the US), and none of those weapons are pointed at the other European states, unless we count Russia as "European".

*sigh* Russia is same European state as is France or Britain, by both culture and geography. Accept that already. It was the state which brought civilisation to most dangerous part of Asia, and faced conquests again and again, same time Britain and France merely slaughtered and enslaved every defenseless naked ass they met.

So yes, they are European, they just don't pretend to care about foreign relations same as Westerners.



Let's say, for example, that France would be under control of military regime starting Third French Empire with conquest of Rhineland. France have warheads.

I really can't imagine Britons or anyone else to risk extinction of mankind for Jerries.

And yes, it can happen, although in this moment it's same fiction as U. S. of Europe.

[Imperializt Russia]

"It can happen" and "it is fiction" are contradictory statements.
It cannot happen, glad I could clear up that confusion for you.

I do normally consider Russia European, but there is a distinction when we are talking about "Russia" and "Europe".

[Socialist Czechia]

"It can happen" and "it is fiction" are contradictory statements.
It cannot happen, glad I could clear up that confusion for you.

No. 'in this moment' words were used.

Historical trend says otherwise, by the way. Exceptionally destructive all-European wars are actually cycle-like event.
Thirty Years War - Seven Years War - Napoleonic Wars - World Wars etc.

Basically, even with horrific losses on both sides, with all the treaties and alliances, in time, people will always forget and will always start again.

[Imperializt Russia]

"It can happen" and "it is fiction" are contradictory statements.
It cannot happen, glad I could clear up that confusion for you.

No. 'in this moment' words were used.

Historical trend says otherwise, by the way. Exceptionally destructive all-European wars are actually cycle-like event.
Thirty Years War - Seven Years War - Napoleonic Wars - World Wars etc.

Basically, even with horrific losses on both sides, with all the treaties and alliances, in time, people will always forget and will always start again.

WWI broke that cycle once the empires fell and the balance of world power shifted. The conclusion of WWII cemented it. Individual European states were broken and not really capable of doing what they could a half century ago, and bent to the will of the new superpowers.

[Socialist Czechia]

I do normally consider Russia European, but there is a distinction when we are talking about "Russia" and "Europe".

...and no, there is no distinction.

Russia is merely guilty to still have something resembling an empire, unlike French and British, irrelevant without their lost colonies, fallen vassals and without EU.

WWI broke that cycle once the empires fell and the balance of world power shifted. The conclusion of WWII cemented it.

I am sure similar things were said in Vienna after Waterloo and in Versailles, 1919.

[Vassenor]

I do normally consider Russia European, but there is a distinction when we are talking about "Russia" and "Europe".

...and no, there is no distinction.

Russia is merely guilty to still have something resembling an empire, unlike French and British, irrelevant without their lost colonies, fallen vassals and without EU.

WWI broke that cycle once the empires fell and the balance of world power shifted. The conclusion of WWII cemented it.

I am sure same things were said in Vienna after Waterloo and in Versailles, 1919.

"This (treaty) is not peace. It is an Armistice for twenty years."

[Imperializt Russia]

The Concert of Europe was untenable once Germany unified. This is why WWI happened and why WWI broke the cycle of the relative peace that had lasted since the Napoleonic era.
It was built on the balance of power where all the countries of Europe basically had the military power to fight one another, and realising this would instead settle their disputes over conference.

Germany, by uniting and becoming the most powerful land state in native resources, manpower and positioning, completely subverted this power balance.
WWII was inevitable precisely because of the Treaty of Versailles. Hitler's rise and the war he started was the final page to end the era that died in WWI.

[Socialist Czechia]

The Concert of Europe was untenable once Germany unified. This is why WWI happened and why WWI broke the cycle of the relative peace that had lasted since the Napoleonic era.

Because everything rise and fall like tides and nothing is forever. That's why this cycle is inevitable. EU will cease to exist same as Concert of Europe.

Only question is when and how.

[Vassenor]

The Concert of Europe was untenable once Germany unified. This is why WWI happened and why WWI broke the cycle of the relative peace that had lasted since the Napoleonic era.

Because everything rise and fall like tides and nothing is forever. That's why this cycle is inevitable. EU will cease to exist same as Concert of Europe.

Only question is when and how.

[citation needed]

[Imperializt Russia]

The Concert of Europe was untenable once Germany unified. This is why WWI happened and why WWI broke the cycle of the relative peace that had lasted since the Napoleonic era.

Because everything rise and fall like tides and nothing is forever. That's why this cycle is inevitable. EU will cease to exist same as Concert of Europe.

Only question is when and how.

Well, no, because Europe is no longer built on the balance of powers or a concert of those powers at conference. The European states no longer compete with each other in Europe or abroad, partly due to the EU encouraging them to co-operate, at least on some level.

Add further that warfare fundamentally changed over the last century several times, and the individual European states predictably weakened from the days of Empire in the face of both not having Empire, not having to fight each other, and the US and USSR muscling in on the whole "military in Europe" thing.

[Teemant]

Because everything rise and fall like tides and nothing is forever. That's why this cycle is inevitable. EU will cease to exist same as Concert of Europe.

Only question is when and how.

[citation needed]

If someone says that sun is yellow then vassenor would probably ask him to citate it.
I don't agree with Socialist Czechia on much but cycles do exist.

[Valaran]

The Concert of Europe was untenable once Germany unified. This is why WWI happened and why WWI broke the cycle of the relative peace that had lasted since the Napoleonic era.

Because everything rise and fall like tides and nothing is forever. That's why this cycle is inevitable. EU will cease to exist same as Concert of Europe.

Only question is when and how.

So, we should end it now, because... its inevitable that things must end?

[Imperializt Russia]

[citation needed]

If someone says that sun is yellow then vassenor would probably ask him to citate it.
I don't agree with Socialist Czechia on much but cycles do exist.

Strictly speaking, the sun is only yellow because of atmospheric scattering and is in fact white.

So it superficially appears one way but when examined in depth, the situation is somewhat different.
I'm overcome with apt parallels.

[Olivaero]

The Concert of Europe was untenable once Germany unified. This is why WWI happened and why WWI broke the cycle of the relative peace that had lasted since the Napoleonic era.

Because everything rise and fall like tides and nothing is forever. That's why this cycle is inevitable. EU will cease to exist same as Concert of Europe.

Only question is when and how.

Nothing is forever... except Europe is forever going to be at war every (insert arbitrary amount of time here). Yeah... seems to be a contradiction there. Perhaps geo-political realities are decided by the constraints and pressures of the time they are in not because some states are near each other? Europe is not doomed for another war because we exist in an era almost unimaginably different than anything that has ever occurred before.

[The Archregimancy]

There are times when the Leave campaign's argument over potentially problematic areas boils down to a Panglossian 'everything will work out for the best in the best of all possible worlds'; it's predicated on simply brushing aside concerns by asserting that it's 'common sense' that the rest of the EU will reach a gentlemanly accommodation with the UK, so why worry?

The extent to which this often mirrors the SNP's position in the independence referendum doesn't escape me.

To be fair though, the UK is a significantly stronger economy than Scotland alone. They would have been in serious shit when the oil price slumped for instance, but the UK on the whole has a very diverse economy less prone to the risks that the Scottish economy would have faced. That and being run by the SNP which has racked up one of the biggest proportional deficits in Europe.

As most people here know, I was as opposed to Scottish independence as I am to Brexit; I don't think anyone here would accuse me of inconsistency on that front.

I can't necessarily say the same for ostensibly pro-Union Leave campaigners.

[The Archregimancy]

Huh? Is it bollocks to lionise Kier Hardie as a "bastion of socialism" on grounds that he was a racist?

I don't even know who that is.

If I'm being really honest, I probably don't care.

While HMS Vanguard was engaging in a classic strawman argument - no one here had even mentioned Keir Hardie - you probably should care just a teensy bit about who he is.

He was the founder of the Labour Party and the first Labour member of Parliament.

[Imperializt Russia]

I had assumed, from his name, that he was a contemporary of Marx or Engels.