20
   

The United Kingdom's bye bye to Europe

 
 
Reply Fri 9 Dec, 2011 05:10 am
After last night's events in Brussels, it's clear that the UK doesn't want to be a part of the Europe (or just the EU?) anymore.

The continent can cope without the British.
But can the UK go to a prosperous future without the Euro, without the continent?

What alliances are now possible? Just the USA, or the a re-organised Commonwealth?

Where will be the future place of this country among Europe, Russia, China, the USA?

The UK has said "Bye, bye Europe".
I hope they know the meaning of "Auf wiedersehen"!
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 20 • Views: 10,598 • Replies: 111

 
Setanta
 
  2  
Reply Fri 9 Dec, 2011 05:53 am
To quote a great Austrian philosopher:

I'll be back.
rosborne979
 
  1  
Reply Fri 9 Dec, 2011 08:18 am
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:

To quote a great Austrian philosopher:

I'll be back.
Ha! Smile great Austrian philosopher... you're killin' me Smile
Setanta
 
  2  
Reply Fri 9 Dec, 2011 08:36 am
They just had a rather amusing story on CBC to the effect that given their financial woes, and the "unattractiveness' of the Euro, the Icelanders want to adopt the Loonie (the Canajun dollar) as their currency. I wonder what Ah-nold would have to say about that!
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Fri 9 Dec, 2011 10:32 am
@Walter Hinteler,
I can't remember where I read the analysis, but the conclusion which made sense to me was that currency boundaries ultimately implied federal boundaries. To be anthropomorphic, the "UK psyche " resists federal union with Europe as evidenced by their original reluctance to join the Eurozone. This latest decision is symptomatic of that resistance but economic events will ultimately decide whether "resistance is futile".
0 Replies
 
contrex
 
  0  
Reply Fri 9 Dec, 2011 12:31 pm
@rosborne979,
rosborne979 wrote:

Ha! Smile great Austrian philosopher... you're killin' me Smile


One of the most famous philosophers of all time was Austrian.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludwig_Wittgenstein

Setanta
 
  2  
Reply Fri 9 Dec, 2011 05:20 pm
@contrex,
That one went right over your head . . .
Mame
 
  1  
Reply Fri 9 Dec, 2011 05:57 pm
@Setanta,
How was the market today? I haven't had a chance to look.

I watched the BBC discussing it for hours. Sarkozy, they said, could hardly conceal his irritation.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  2  
Reply Fri 9 Dec, 2011 05:59 pm
Am I right in thinking that the major sticking point for the Brits was the financial transaction fee that was proposed, which would basically stab the City of London right in the Heart?

Not that I'm against the proposed transaction fee, I could care less about that ultra-corrupt, extra-legal area which has done so much to screw the entire world with it's complete lack of financial regulation...

Cycloptichorn
Mame
 
  2  
Reply Fri 9 Dec, 2011 06:09 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Yes, it was.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  2  
Reply Sun 11 Dec, 2011 03:48 am
It's also a sovereignty issue--and sovereignty is something which the EU has never effectively addressed. Ever crucial issue is put up for a plebecite, or a vote by nation--and the population of one or more countries, or the governments of one of more countries, torpedo the deal. As a "union," it's farcical.
0 Replies
 
roger
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Dec, 2011 03:50 am
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:

They just had a rather amusing story on CBC to the effect that given their financial woes, and the "unattractiveness' of the Euro, the Icelanders want to adopt the Loonie (the Canajun dollar) as their currency. I wonder what Ah-nold would have to say about that!


Sounds like an idea to me. Can we do that, too?
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Dec, 2011 03:51 am
@roger,
I don't think the Canucks are that dumb, Boss.
0 Replies
 
saab
 
  2  
Reply Sun 11 Dec, 2011 07:54 am
How about GB going together with people with the same ideas?
80% of the Norwegians do not want to be in EU
90% of the Swedes don´t want the Euro.
65% of the Danes are against the Euro and there is a great sceptesism regarding EU.
Sept 2011 37% of the Finns were satisfied with EU.
roger
 
  2  
Reply Sun 11 Dec, 2011 08:00 am
@saab,
You mean, with their own currency. Sounds plausible.
saab
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Dec, 2011 08:38 am
@roger,
Sweden, Denmark and Norway already have kronor.
UK can keep their pounds.
Sweden, Denmark and Norway started kronor on the same level around 1890(?), but after about 30 years it did not work out any more.
If three countries so much alike could not have the same currency at the same exchange level how are 17 countries going to work out.
It took 30 years about 130 years ago when things moved so much slower.
I gave the Euro 10 years without problems.... sorry to say I was right.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  2  
Reply Sun 11 Dec, 2011 09:49 am
@saab,
Actually it's not about the currency or the name of it when you follow the British media.
Douglas Carswell MP in today's Mail on Sunday
http://i41.tinypic.com/33bfyfp.jpg
Quote:

[...]
The single European currency is just the latest in a long line of attempts by European elites to arrange the affairs of the Continent by grand design – from Napoleon's France to Kaiser Bill's Germany and beyond.
[...]
Britain could once again take her rightful place as part of the global Anglosphere – that sprawling collection of English-speaking countries, with which we already have much in common; Australia, Singapore, India, Canada, New Zealand, South Africa, the United States.
saab
 
  2  
Reply Sun 11 Dec, 2011 10:33 am
@Walter Hinteler,
That I knew - it is much more than just a currency.
0 Replies
 
CalamityJane
 
  2  
Reply Sun 11 Dec, 2011 10:48 am
The Brits weren't that connected to the EU to begin with, which showed clearly when they repelled the Euro, when they negated free-border travels, when they vetoed and criticized just about every contract and treaty the EU had presented all the while benefiting from the EU.
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Dec, 2011 11:25 am
@CalamityJane,
I've been regularly in the UK since 1963 - I only can emphasise what you posted, CJ. (Though I know personally mainly strong pro-Europeans there.)

From a blog posting by Sunder Katwala:
Quote:
[...]Firstly, the British psychological contract with the European project has been different, and less positive, than for its European partners. Just about every other member of the European Union gained something important, in its sense of itself, when it made the choice for Europe. For France and Germany, it was the foundation of their ‘never again’ compact after seventy years of recurring conflict, giving security to France and rehabilitating Germany in a constructive and peaceful role for a democratic federal republic. Ireland used Europe to escape the shadow of England, and emerged a more confident young country. For Spain, Portugal and Greece after the dictatorships, joining Europe was a sign of modernity and democracy, while the central and East European countries were completing the dissolution of the iron curtain which had isolated them from the other half of the continent, by choosing to join when the wall fell in 1989.

For Britain, ending up in the European club was a story of disappointed post-war hopes and the need to face up to the reality of relative post-war decline. Britain had been in favour of Europe for the other Europeans, as a benign outsider while itself having bigger fish at the top table of geopolitics. After 1956, that was clearly a mistake, yet it took another generation of agonised uncertainty, first about whether to join, and then whether we would be allowed to do so, leaving an indelible sense that we were turning up to a party that somebody else had organised. We joined because we had no choice. And we stayed in, in 1975, around the psychological nadir of British fortunes, not so much with Beethoven’s ninth in our hearts, because relative economic decline meant that it was no time to leave a Christmas club, still less the Common market.

Secondly, Britain does politics differently. “England does not love coalitions”, said Disraeli. The European Union is above all an exercise in the politics of coalition, across 27 countries no less. But our institutions and culture are winner takes all, not give and take as being in our enlightended collective interest. We look at our first peacetime coalition for decades primarily through the lens of whether the LibDems or the Tories are guilty of the greater betrayal of their principles or their followers through the necessary evil of political compromise. Offered a more pluralist political system, voters rejected it, fearing it would introduce more messy compromises. It is hardly surprising that our history of engagement with the European Union, whichever party is in power, is dominated by the shadow of the handbag, ‘game, set and match’ to Britain, and the apparently irresistible urge to see European diplomacy as the continuation of war by other means.

Thirdly, the British have never believed in “ever closer union”. A European crisis usually looks like a moment to slow down, and to ask whether the EU has bitten off more than it can chew. But the instinctive answer of other European governments is that the answer to a faltering Europe is usually ‘more Europe’ to try to make the system more effective or more legitimate.[...]
 

Related Topics

THE BRITISH THREAD II - Discussion by jespah
FOLLOWING THE EUROPEAN UNION - Discussion by Mapleleaf
Amanda Knox - Discussion by ossobuco
Sinti and Roma: History repeating - Discussion by Walter Hinteler
[B]THE RED ROSE COUNTY[/B] - Discussion by Mathos
Leaving today for Europe - Discussion by cicerone imposter
So you think you know Europe? - Discussion by nimh
 
  1. Forums
  2. » The United Kingdom's bye bye to Europe
Copyright © 2017 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 10/19/2017 at 07:29:11