@Fil Albuquerque,
Fil Albuquerque wrote:
I agree is much more challenging now. Still that would be in my opinion the best approach. Again at least the Turks would not feel ostracized.
If anything, the EU needs to get rid of some of its current free-wheelers, not enlist new ones.
The thing that voluntarist Eurobuilders tend to forgot is that the EEC-then-EU was built on the ashes of WW2, by nations who came to terms with the dangers of what you call "tribalism" (ie nationalism). They looked back and saw the massive horror their dreams of national glory had produced, they swallowed their national pride and re-evaluated their own history in that new light of the Holocaust, all the destruction, all the hatred. They soon realized that even the way they had been studying and teaching history in schools (their historiography) was geared to foster a strong sense of nationalism amongst their children, and that a cultural evolution was necessary. To a degree at least, and of course it's truer of the nominal "loosers" Germany and Italy than it is of the UK or even France, but still, there is at the core of the modern European project a desire to go beyond petty nationalism, and play nice with neighbours for a change.
Did the Eastern European nations hastingly enlisted in the EU ranks know that? No they didn't, as the case of ultra-nationalist Hungary demonstrates.
Do the Turks know that they need to come to some terms with their own history and historiography, before they can enter the EU? No they don't. Try and discuss the Armenian genocide with ANY Turk, and you will quickly understand that there is plenty undigested tribalism in their collective mind.
In the end, the determinent factor in Brexit was a revival of the pre-WW2 mentality in some parts of the English (mainly) electorate. It was a tribal vote, fueled by deep rooted contempt for "the continent" and a sense of national
grandeur. That's why the Leave vote was mainly an English vote, not a Scottish one.