Thanks for the considerate and helpful replies.
That is where you are wrong, most want what we have, because every single line in every single treaty has been agreed to by every single EU government for half a century and people did re-elect those governments again and again and again.
And yet 52% of the voters in the UK did vote to leave, and a common concern was the loss of control of all aspects of immigration, as well as the feeling that the EU is not reflecting the will of the UK's citizens. I think they would prefer a trading union as opposed to a United States of Europe.
The propaganda that was based on has practically nothing to do what the EU actually
is and does, so it would be completely irrelevant what changes were made to the EU.
Getting out of the EU is pretty much the only way for Britain now to get the toxic propaganda of the past several decades out of its system and to get an actually realistic picture of the difference between being in and out.
The EU has its full share of difficulties, problems and deficiencies, but that still is on a completely different level from the absurd fantasies the Brexit vote was based on.
Changes will have to take place in Britain first and foremost for dealing with the attitudes there.
Changes to the EU are relevant to the rest of us, though, and among these there should be the medium-term changing of the European Commission away from basically being a cabinet appointed by and shared among the member state governments and towards a government elected and controlled by the directly elected European Parliament which we already have but whose powers are still limited.
There are many other, smaller changes as well, and many needed reforms have in fact been blocked by Britain for many years because it was anathema to the british governments to have any deepening and strengthening of the European Union, but that is urgently needed in many places. Basing it on the European Parliament's direct democratic mandate is also the only real way to get that done in the longer run.
Do you mind people from Nebraska moving in next door to you? Or from Alaska? No? See, that is how "we" want "us" to feel as well.
My main point was that by getting to the desired situation by tossing open the borders and seeing how it all ends up is not workable and is naturally going to lead to resentment.
It just seems to be a non-pragmatic approach, overly simplistic if not idealistic, and bound to cause problems.
It makes it easy for the rabble rousers to undermine the whole project, which is exactly what we see now.
Nope. It's pretty much a non-issue all across Europe in most cases.
The problem in Britain was (and is) that the conservative government first ran a brutal austerity policy cutting and squeezing social services to the brink and at the same time – supported by large parts of the press – the Brexit campaign ran a relentless scapegoating campaign against the EU and foreign workers which had actually been wanted and attracted by the UK government before.
Germany had a gradual admission scheme regarding access for people from the new eastern-european members, and that was fully in compliance with EU regulations. It was actually the british government's decision to forgo any such limitations and to welcome eastern-european workers with open arms right from the start, and to little surprise they actually came and helped the UK economy where they were needed.
And now they were made the scapegoats for the failings of the current government's austerity policy.
It's utterly disgusting, and it is not accidental at all that this diversion-by-scapegoating approach has been used many times before, with usually not very pretty results. Donald Trump is right now doing pretty much the same in the US.
Last edited by Klaus
on Thu Jun 30, 2016 3:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.