There's a lot of aggression on this site from pro-European Britons towards European citizens.
Why?
...
...
...
It's remainer whiplash
A ๐งต
#rejoinEU is quite a wide spectrum politically. This is not surprising. They range from (small C) conservatives, who want to go back to the status quo to committed Europhiles, who want the UK to take a fuller part in the community.
2
For most, there is little friction. However, within that group there are several cohorts making unwanted and even #exceptionalist demands on Europe.
3
Broadly, they can be classified as follows:
- demands for an easy improvement of the TCA to suit the UK, often made by Labour supporters
4
- demands for baubles, often on trust, to be given to the UK, out of solidarity with remainers and to promote the idea of Europe among the UK public. For example, Galileo, youth visas, European citizenship.
5
- demands for accession criteria to either European membership or EEA to be waived, particularly, standards, legal process, โฌ and Schengen membership, and unanimity of MSs.
6
- demands for Europe to amend its treaties to allow Britons advantages in travel, including 180/360 visa waivers and individual MS visa waivers, without any benefit to Europe.
7
The question, as always, when you get into the meat of it, is "What's in it for Europe?" or even "But that's against treaty law, we can't do that"
Remainers are crestfallen.
8
And then they're angry.
"We're on the same side. We are Europeans. Why can't you do this for us? You're worse than the Brexiters."
9
And that's the whiplash: we were on the same side; now we're not.
Before the Brexit process, the union made major sacrifices to keep the UK in. We never wanted you to leave (most of us).
10
Following the vote, we wanted you to win. We saw the populism and the far right infection in a major MS and friend and wanted to you to vanquish it. It was not to be, which is our loss as well as yours.
11
Now the UK is outside. You are, in a sense, all Brexiters. Your state doesn't accept European law, standards or arbitration, and you don't contribute, financially or otherwise, to the general wellbeing of the community.
12
Even leaving aside the sense of betrayal, saying, "But we're not like them", while true, is unhelpful. You're not asking us to make that distinction.
13
You're asking us to give preference to the entire UK, Brexiter, remainer and other, above other third countries, above candidate states, even in some cases above European citizens and MSs.
Kinda nuts, no?
14
Your winning is now secondary. Because your winning doesn't mean Europe winning. And that's the issue. We want benefits to Europe, whether its battery factories, or quicker passport control, extension of our internet standards or smoother policy-making.
15
So, whole I can say personally that I want the UK to be better, to solve its child poverty issues, to build a better education system, to improve productivity, to roll back the authoritarian tendency...
16
to fix its governmental mess in NI, to have better access to healthcare, to resolve its constitutional struggles amicably, to reduce its regional inequality, to be better for my friends and family there
17
That's just me, and that is secondary, and that is very much not a priority for Europe, which wants to deal with its problems.
18
So what to do?
Concentrate on the UK first. Whinging at and to Europe is absolutely counterproductive -- we won't make Brexit work for you.
19
At the risk of being repetitive, think about what Europe wants and make offers that meet those desires. Respect Europe's redlines.
20
Most of all, when you're winning, apply for EEA or Europe in good faith. Watch the support from Europeans and MSs, including me, flood back. We'll eat together as family again.
Bada bing!
21
A thread on how the euro and open borders *are* Europe you might enjoy.
Maria Ramirez is right, of course, Diego Garcia means nothing for Gibraltar.
But I will reiterate, what we are seeing is a very bad tactical decision - not for the first time - on the part of Gib and esp. the former Tory government coming back to bite them.
1
During the WA negotiations on Ireland and the chicanery that has gone on since, has been about "facts on the ground".
2
I'm including the NI Protocol Bill, by which the UKG could ignore parts of treaties it had signed up to, and the UK ask that they would try "alternative arrangements" and then revert to checks at Larne in the event they didn't work.
So, I listened to the Spectator's big Tory fringe event on Brexit.
A ๐งต
(See, who says you don't need foreigners to do the jobs that Britons don't want to?).
It has to be said, the panel didn't inspire confidence. Hannan is a veteran zealous Euroskeptic, Jacobs is part of the Europhobic industrial complex, while IDS is the worst kind of reactionary Tory.
2
The main subject was around the lack of a dividend. There was some polite chat then about deregulation, particularly as regards AI and other hi-tech areas, and regarding trade deals, particularly to import cheaper food, which to date the panel found uninspiring.
@chrisgreybrexit opens his last paragraph of Friday's blog with a quite profound point. I don't think it's arrogant to say in 2016 I knew more than the vast majority of the population about Europe. Yet I've been surprised every day.
It's like staring at the Milky Way.
A ๐งต
It is the simpliism of the media and politicians towards quitting, and indeed the simpliism of the electorate, who should have smelt a rat, that frustrates.
2
Nevertheless, the basic problem, in trade terms, is clear. The UK is outside of the institutional structures that enable free trade.
When the euro was just a wee slip of a currency, a global financial crisis happened. This had a traumatic effect on many small countries, in particular on Greece. There, a fiscal crisis reared its head
Government revenues were no longer adequate
A ๐งต
This represented, frankly, an existential crisis for the euro, which was still untried as a reserve currency on the world stage; for Europe as a whole, as unity would almost certainly have fractured with the euro; and for Greece, it'd have been blown back to the 70s
2
The MSs cobbled together solutions, with international institutions, but could not agree on a particular way forward to resolve the problem. And so it trundled on.
Eventually they concluded that treaty change was needed to allow ECB solutions to bolster and protect the euro
The idea is out there and widespread that the UK electorate were somehow innocent babes in the woods when it came to the votes that shaped Britain's relationship with Europe, especially 2015-24.
I do not subscribe to that idea.
A ๐งต
Voters were told that they held all the cards, that their economy would boom and Europe's would suffer, unless Europe gave the British voters what they wanted. That Audi and Mercedes would force Europe to concede.
2
Voters were told that they could take back control of their borders, take Europeans' right to live and work in the UK, even remove them from that state, but that they themselves would retain the right to work, live and retire in Europe.
The Economist has absolutely smashed it out of the park with this article. A classic Economist analysis piece, clipped style, but not being said elsewhere.
A ๐งต
So, firstly we have the current situation: the UK is governed by a hard Brexit party.
It has good features, but on Europe it is further to the tight than the RN, Fd'I or even paries like the SVP in Switzerland.
That's just the reality, hard as it is to hear.
2
How is this possible?
Pro-Europeanism is really popular in the UK.
(we can argue about what proportion is exceptionalism, transactionalism or just contrarianism, but either way ๐ช๐บ is far more popular than Brexit)