The United States of Europe - Federal Europe, demanded by common sense

I think we’ve had this discussion before, but you still seem to think you can pass judgement on what the British think on the basis of a year’s stay and a few conversations with people on the internet. No one really knows what people think of the EU because our governments have refused to ask them for more than 30 years. However, I think it’s safe to assume that the views put forward by the European Commission, the European Parliament and people like you are deeply unpopular here with easily the majority being against. That’s why political parties at least play down their support, and often promise things they cannot do whilst we are EU members, whenever they are campaigning for votes. Pro-EU parties gain support of the back deceit. That’s why we need a free and fair referendum debate before a referendum. I suspect that we will withdraw if such a debate takes place. And yes, I will most definitely say the vote has been rigged if the referendum debate is not free and fair. Experience tells me it probably won’t be. However, if the voters support EU membership on the back of a free and fair debate, then I will shake my head but wish the electorate good luck.

And an inadequately funded pro-EU campaign? Are you joking? Do you know how much the EU spends on promoting itself? The British establishment will no doubt do its part to further the EU’s aims as it always has whenever the electorate can be fooled.

I’m not worried about anyone’s vote, provided it’s gained after a full fair referendum debate. Recent immigrants who have acquired citizenship have the same right to a vote as any other British citizen, and so they should. I have no problem with embracing diversity. It’s embracing an anti-democratic, corrupt system of government that I reject.

Who’s anticipating referendums? The EU decided it does not like referendums after the difficulties in France, the Netherlands and Ireland. Successive British govts have avoided any dialogue about our relationship with the EU with the electorate, let alone granted a referendum, but even if a we manage to drag our political elite kicking and squealing to the referendum table if previous votes are anything to go by a referendum will be heavily influenced by a heavily funded propaganda campaign.

Having a European Army making military outposts of British overseas territories is a really obnoxious thought.

You know that many, many people here are totally clueless as to what EU membership means? Our pro-EU mainstream political parties have been so successful over the years, that these people actually think the EU no more than an irritant in their lives. Perhaps, these are the 'neutrals' you so delicately questioned?

 

The media in Britain are straight-banana nutters, almost to a man. The people who do productive work and sell abroad are at one with those the tories rob ragged, on the other hand, in knowing that the EU is our only hope. It seems very likely that the brainwashed serfs of England will - if given the chance - vote for their mad masters, which will, I do trust, lead to the break-up of the UK, with England sheering off to become a second Puerto Rico and the rest of us staying in the EU.

 

I agree with you about the value of the UK media.

All mainstream parties rob the people who do productive work anywhere and they still provide crap services. But curiously you appear happy to be a brainwashed serf of the EU which robs people ragged and doesn't provide any services at all! Plaid Cymru wants to raise income tax to 50% for top earners which seems to be a fairly futile gesture when only around 4,000 people out of Wales’ population of 3 million pay the top rate. So the pickings aren’t that rich for a Socialist party. Don't Plaid rob people ragged? Will Wales become more prosperous if the Wales leaves the UK? If so, what will make the difference? Or is this just national pride talking?

If you think the EU is Wales’ only hope, then good luck with that, and if you want the break up of the UK, I'm sure you will not expect the English to stand in the way of any Welsh nationalist campaign for it.

What is it about an independent UK or an independent England that leads you to believe we’d be a second Puerto Rico? Scores of successful countries are not members of a political union that dictates their domestic policies and charges them for the privilege.

 

I think 50% is far too low. Why do we need robbers? 'Wales' will of course be immensely more prosperous if we get out of the thieves' kitchen that has robbed us of everything not nailed down since the Annexation, especially into civilized Europe. England is a forelocktugging colony run for Yanks and Russian criminals, surely?

 

Why have you put Wales in inverted commas?

You think a 50% top tax rate is far too low? You really think a future Plaid govt should set the top tax rate at more than 50%? How is that not robbery? I'm not surprised Plaid's support has declined.

And who are the "thieves"? And the UK is as much a part of Europe as any other European state. Do you mean the EU? If so, how is it any more civilised than the UK?

If the UK is a 'forelock tugging colony' at all, it is at the instigation of pro-EU parties. It is to the EU that they have signed away our independence, treaty by treaty, policy by policy. We have no such obligations to the US or to Russia (unless you know something about this I don't. Do you?) A new government could refuse to submit to anything parliament doesn't want. Of course if it does refuse to submit to EU directives, regulations or decisions, the EC will take it before the European Courts of Justice which is why, so far, governments have rarely done so. Yep, forelock tugging colony sounds about the size of it.

 

It's not impossible, in the longer term, depending on EU policies. Parts of Wales are among the poorest in the whole of the old EU, despite the UK being one of the richest countries - trickle down economics on a UK-wide level certainly didn't improve the South Wales Valleys, and even the creator of the Barnett Formula agrees that it has treated Wales (and Northern Ireland) unfairly (unlike Scotland) in terms of its actual needs, but beyond even that for many years the UK government effectively blocked the EU funding that was actually available to help such a poor region (the same kind of funding that the Republic of Ireland did so well out of in the past).

It is entirely possible that Wales could actually benefit financially from being a relatively poor part of the EU directly, rather than a poor and ignored part of the UK.

On the other hand it's also entirely possible that it would not benefit, and would be worse off economically. The important thing, though, and what is often missing from the debate as portrayed in the UK media, is that the discussions about such issues should be open, honest and based on facts and probabilities rather than simplistic assumptions (like 'Wales being too small to ever survive without England').

 

Wales is certainly large enough to be an independant country -there are plenty of those a lot smaller..and in the EU and it might well make sense for it to be more independent within the EU. However there are a lot of Jobs that are UK dependent the DVLA being a prime example.

Personally I am in favour of maximum devolution within a UK framework. I think it would be ideal if England,NI, Wales and Scotland were treated as independent countries WITHIN the EU but as part of the UK when dealing outside it I'm not sure how you would achieve it, though.

 

There are indeed, although the DVLA could easily be contracted to provide the same service for the whole of the former UK, or modified to take on functions for Wales currently provided at the UK level (passports, for example - there is a 'regional' passport office still in Newport, but it no longer processes applications itself), so independence certainly wouldn't automatically mean the end of the DVLA and its jobs.

I would agree with that kind of solution, but with a proper, even system of much greater regional devolution within England too. The current devolution settlement for the UK is unbalanced and unsustainable, in my opinion. I also think the Lib Dems should have been working more closely with Plaid and the SNP to achieve that kind of thing, rather than trying to dismiss them as 'madmen' as we often seem to have been - devolution is a process, and we should be working together on that process even if their ultimate goal is to go one step further than ours would be - in the case of Wales, even Plaid know that that final step would be a long way off anyway.

Along with that, I do find it slightly distasteful the way that Michael Moore has appeared to be so resolutely pushing nothing but the pure, hardcore unionist line in the debate on the Scotland referendum, rather than taking the Lib Dem line I would rather see, which is to remain relatively neutral in ensuring that the debate is kept open and honest on both sides, and the 'facts and figures' from both sides are properly scrutinised and questioned, so that the people of Scotland can make a properly informed choice about the issues (and the long term options, even if they are not all being offered as part of this referendum). Appearing to be a purely 'unionist' party in that way does nothing to promote a belief in a long term 'devo-max' type solution, in my opinion - it will only make us appear to Scotland (and Wales) as if we are just another 'party of Westminster'.

 

What will you call 60% of the Italian electorate that risen their middle finger to EU ?

 

Don't know what I'd call them, but I'd tell them to sort out the massive problems of corruption and nepotism that they have riddled throughout their government and bureaucratic mechanisms.

 

Their problems are the eurozone and neoliberalism ,Italy was corrupted and nepotist since the creation of the state back in 1870's and this didn't stop them from becoming an industry giant .

 

It didn't, but it has caused them huge and ongoing problems with becoming a modern economy and a modern country in the modern world, and it's also part of the problem with the EU - modern countries are seeking to work with countries effectively in many ways still being run according to the practises of the 19th century, and that's just never going to function properly. In almost any other first world country, Berlusconi would be in prison, and certainly not running for office. It goes even beyond that, though - there are serious implications for the quality of a bureaucracy chosen by nepotism rather then merit, and serious economic issues caused by restrictive corrupt and nepotistic practises in businesses, local planning, and so on. If Italy wants to avoid an economic and political collapse into chaos, it needs to address these issues urgently - ignoring the problem and blaming other issues is not going to help at all.

 

It is not only Italy that blames the EU .
You show that you don't understand Italians and this is expected from someone from the European north. Hiring prostitutes is nothing to be ashamed of and yeah one happen to be underaged but none forced her and the age of consent is below age of adulthood.. do you get what i am saying? so no Gargamel should not be in prison .
I agree on you on the issue of corruption but this is what one gets when dealing with banksters and the plutocracy.

What EU managed is to make a country's problem everyone's problem , my troubles shouldn't be yours and the way country here or Italy is run should not be of your concern , if they like to be nepotist and corrupt it is their conscious choice and they should be the only ones dealing with the results.

 

Sorry, but yes it is something to be ashamed of for any political leader. It's also against the law, and people who habitually break laws should not be among the political leaders. It's not only that, though - there's corruption issues as well as sex scandals. It simply isn't acceptable for politicians to behave in that kind of manner in the modern world, especially when they then fill their government with young women on the basis of their looks. It is corruption on top of criminality on top of a complete lack of understanding of morality and basic issues such as equality, and respect for the female half of the population.

I understand Italians quite well (I've known a number of them, and visited Italy) - many of them are fine and decent people (and most of those think the fact that Berlusconi isn't yet in prison, and continues to stand for office, is just as ridiculous as most of the rest of the world does!), but some of the men in particular are arrogant self-obsessed narcissists who think of women purely as objects to be exploited for their own gratification (that's not unique to Italy, of course, but it does seem to be an attitude more widespread among Italian men than most other groups). That is simply not an acceptable attitude to have and to use when governing a supposedly civilised country in the modern world.

That much I certainly agree with.

I sincerely hope that if Berlusconi does end up in a position of power at the end of this election cycle, the respectable leaders of other EU countries will simply refuse to meet or do any business whatsoever with him. He is nothing more than a misogynist criminal, and should have no place at the table of international diplomacy and negotiation.

 

It would definitely mean the end of DVLA and its jobs. Government departments have been moved out to poorer areas as a form of giving local employment. If Wales was independent it would be moved to a poorer part of wherever in the rump UK was experiencing high unemployment.

If Plaid and the SNP hadn't played such extreme politics I might agree but they are generally so offensive that I really feel uncomfortable dealing with them

Yes - I think you are right here.

 

Are you suggesting a confederation?

 

Explain what you perceive as extreme politics, pretty please.

 

Politics that panders to nationalism., ethnic superiority or hatred are some examples.

- - - Updated - - -

No I am suggesting a federation.

 

Still you don't understand southerners or Italians ! it is not about decency , if you can (*)(*)(*)(*) around and get away with it you are "the man" . We had a case of a politician that left his old wife for a young blond flying steward , media smear him but people reworded his party with 47% and easy victory. Our morals are far different from yours .

What Silvio did is illegal indeed but everyone knows that the little (*)(*)(*)(*)(*) chose to attend his party for the coin , yes he is running his business like Benito and he loves to work with pretty women but still this is Italy and nobody wants to socialise with ugly ones .
I am not defending him or his "ideas" and of course he is a clown but right now what each and every country in the European south needs is to (*)(*)(*)(*) of EZ , Italy is the biggest in the area and it should give the final blow to the zone with Silvio helping things out.

 

There have been some occasional examples of such things among a small minority of members in both parties, but any element of that in the mainstream thinking of both parties went out of the window a long time ago. Part of the problem is one of perception from across the border - because the media in England don't report the majority of what Plaid say and do (because it's obviously not relevant to them), it's harder to get a balanced picture of what the party is really about. The habit of incorrectly referring to them as 'Nationalists' really doesn't help - they certainly aren't 'Nationalists' in the sense that the like of the BNP are in any way at all, they are 'Secessionists' (and also firmly 'Internationalist'), but that is not the impression the UK media tend to give by using the same tainted term to describe them both. It's a mistake to think that they are in any way about saying that Wales is in any way 'superior' to anyone else - they aren't.

I have known quite a number of Plaid members (in fact, where I used to live, all if the councillors were Plaid, and I have certainly voted for them in the past), and 'ethnic superiority or hatred' has absolutely no place in their thinking - quite the opposite, in fact. They are obviously a broad church, like any party, but generally speaking are 'Social Democrats', although with more 'Socialist' tendencies than those in the Lib Dems (especially with Leanne Wood as their current leader, who is taking them even further to the left) - any xenophobic 'nationalists' that do become mistakenly attracted to them don't last long or get very far, because they don't actually agree with anything they stand for.

 

Leaving a wife for another woman is considerably different from the behaviour of Berlusconi! Such things happen here, and create no more than a momentary blip of interest - it only effects someone's political career if they are consistently doing something far more 'shady', 'secretive' and 'dishonest' (or illegal!) than that. It doesn't win anybody votes, but it doesn't lose them any in the long term either - when it comes down to it, as much as the tabloid media like a whiff of scandal, nobody really cares about such things here in this day and age.