Britain and the EU

Sapphire

CLAPTON wrote: »

The Germany open door policy was made BEFORE the other countries agreed.
The decision was made by Germany acting alone and then the other members were faced with the (inevitable) reality on the ground.

In a sense you are correct though : the other member states did sign up to German Hegemony over Europe and that's exactly what they have got. It just wasn't so obvious and blatant before.

Yes, to your point one. However, with regard to your second point, I don't think German hegemony over Europe was ever mentioned to the UK, and most probably not to other European nations. Given Germany's history with countries like Poland in central Europe, they would never have agreed to join on that basis. It seems to me that Germany has just grown in power due to having a strong economy, and now Merkel and Junker appear to think this gives them the right to impose their political views and conditions on all the other countries. This is so wrong, and thank goodness Germany no longer has a strong Wermacht.

Given the strong rise of opposition to the acceptance of migrants from the Middle East and Africa all over Europe (including in Germany), I doubt whether Merkel and Junker will be able to impose their political policies on the rest of Europe (or even Germany) for much longer.

CLAPTON

Sapphire wrote: »

Yes, to your point one. However, with regard to your second point, I don't think German hegemony over Europe was ever mentioned to the UK, and most probably not to other European nations. Given Germany's history with countries like Poland in central Europe, they would never have agreed to join on that basis. It seems to me that Germany has just grown in power due to having a strong economy, and now Merkel and Junker appear to think this gives them the right to impose their political views and conditions on all the other countries. This is so wrong, and thank goodness Germany no longer has a strong Wermacht.

Given the strong rise of opposition to the acceptance of migrants from the Middle East and Africa all over Europe (including in Germany), I doubt whether Merkel and Junker will be able to impose their political policies on the rest of Europe (or even Germany) for much longer.

to the extent that countries joined because of German gold, I would take the view they understood that the man who pays the piper calls the tune.
The price is always paid when times are hard and not when everything is swimming nicely

Sapphire

CLAPTON wrote: »

to the extent that countries joined because of German gold, I would take the view they understood that the man who pays the piper calls the tune.
The price is always paid when times are hard and not when everything is swimming nicely

I can assure you that having spoken to many people on the Continent, that is not the case – what you say is nonsense, pardon the expression. Similarly, with regard to the UK, I was never aware of 'German gold' when the UK joined the EU. Most people understood that the EU was created mainly for economic purposes, not for political ones, i.e. that it was hoped that it would benefit all the countries economically, but that political decisions were down to each country individually, and each country would have an equal share of any vote (especially when it came to things like migration from outside the EU), given what separate and very different histories and cultures the countries have.

angrypirate

Anyone else notice that the people leading the "stay" campaign are exactly the same people who led the "UK in the Euro" campaign 10 years ago. Glad we ignored them back then and gives weight to ignoring them now.

CLAPTON

Sapphire wrote: »

I can assure you that having spoken to many people on the Continent, that is not the case – what you say is nonsense, pardon the expression. Similarly, with regard to the UK, I was never aware of 'German gold' when the UK joined the EU. Most people understood that the EU was created mainly for economic purposes, not for political ones, i.e. that it was hoped that it would benefit all the countries economically, but that political decisions were down to each country individually, and each country would have an equal share of any vote (especially when it came to things like migration from outside the EU), given what separate and very different histories and cultures the countries have.

whatever the original objective were, political union has been the dominate direction for a long time.
Recent joiners have all been net recipients of EU gold.

Sapphire

CLAPTON wrote: »

Recent joiners have all been net recipients of EU gold.

Irrelevant to your argument. That's what the EU is for – improving economies, not creating a United States of Germany.:mad:

CLAPTON

Sapphire wrote: »

Irrelevant to your argument. That's what the EU is for – improving economies, not creating a United States of Germany.:mad:

No, the EU purpose is now to create a united states of europe with integrated economic, legal and political systems.


My argument is that it is largely equivalent to a united states of germany.

Sapphire

CLAPTON wrote: »

No, the EU purpose is now to create a united states of europe with integrated economic, legal and political systems.


My argument is that it is largely equivalent to a united states of germany.

If that is the case, then we are certainly better out than in. And I don't think central European countries would take to being a part of a United States of Germany that you describe, dictated to by Germany, given their history with that country, which has just recently issued a timely reminder of this history by its bullying tactics. The least that Germany should be doing is giving economic support to countries like Poland, given the absolutely appalling suffering it caused there during the Second World War (which continues to have strong effects to this day) – rather than attempting to cause such countries even more grief.

End of argument as far as I'm concerned.

Graham_Devon

Mistermeaner wrote: »

Risk with referendums on this stuff is its easy to whip up support for the separatists on the basis of misplaced nationalism, where poorly informed fools are allowed to vote with their hearts.

The thing about a referendum is it doesn't allow people who think they know better than those they disagree with to carry on regardless.

Graham_Devon

antrobus wrote: »

The nature of being a member of a club, is that you have to abide by the rules of that club. The SNP, for example, are very unhappy about some of the rules that Club UK are adopting, which probably explains why they would prefer to leave Club UK and set up their own club.

And this sums up, for me, the overarching reason I will be voting out.

In response to threats of the removal of funding if countries do not do what the two most powerful want, you reply that "if you are in the club, you have to abide by the rules of the club".

It appears that the democracy of all other nations has been swept aside. Suddenly, you have to accept the rule Germany and France have decided to impose to stay with the club.

Well I don't want to be in such a club. I'm all for free trade. I'm all for the roots of what the EU was.

I'm not for what you described above.

Germany decided on it's own back to welcome hundreds of thousands of people into the EU. It did not seek approval from anyone else in the "club". The rules of your "club" are being written, in the most part, by Germany. It cannot enforce it's will on all other nations by means of threatening the withdrawl of money (well it can, and is, but it's causing upset).

I find it extraordinary that anyone would be so blind to what's just happened and pretend it's all part of parcel of being in a group.