Sounds like they want a back door in to EU, while not following the rules. I am guessing they will not offer to pay in to this system, like EU members would.
They had a priviliged founding position in the EU and threw that away. They should just bite the bullet and join as a normal member.
As someone with a UK passport, I am fully on board with rejoining as a regular member. Biggest negative change for me would be the currency and I’m fine with that, it’s a small price to pay for free trade and freedom of movement.
But, but, but,… they wanted so much to be out of the EU!
The EU should still make quitting the EU possible. E.g. if landlocked countries can’t quit because the EU taxes transport too much for them then the EU becomes a prison, not only for those countries.
Guess what the UK did: they did leave. Many still consider it Putins biggest victory until he got his asset into the White House.
Britain has the Commonwealth. That’s not like any other member.
And what good did it do? It’s not as if the Commonwealth was still a source of riches for the UK as it was back in the 1800s.
By that argument, the EU would be ‘punishing’ countries for not joining in the first place. EU membership comes with benefits and obligations; countries can choose to leave to avoid the obligations, but the benefits only come as a result of fulfilling them.
That’s what happened. Countries had to join. Of course it’s normal to expect people to fulfill the obligations for the benefits. But to rely on this to keep the EU together allows for corruption that will become a detriment for everybody.
None of the benefits existed before the EU existed. Countries economically benefit from joining the EU due to those novel benefits, but in absence of them, countries otherwise don’t lose anything they had already by not joining.
None of the disadvantages of not joining existed either. If neighboring countries stop doing business because transaction costs with countries within the EU are becoming cheaper for them then a country can shrink, or join the EU. In democracies that will inevitably lead to pro EU parties winning.
Does this make sense to you?
Where do I lose you?
That’s…that’s how mutually beneficial agreements work?
Yes. Yet is it wise to use the power to force other countries to support it?
It is? What isn’t possible is leaving the EU but still being a part of the EU but only in the ways that benefit you at the EU’s expense.
The EU is in a position to demand this but it’s breeding resentments if countries are forced to join. There is no need to give all benefits, just enough that membership is not obligatory.
If you want european benefits, then yeah - you HAVE to join.
You can’t be part of the club without being part of the club
Nah, the twats wanted all the benefits but none of the obligations. The EU gave them the bird.
Fuck Axel Springer though.
I didn’t understand this comment, so I checked who owns Politico. Turns out, it’s Axel Springer SE, which is for 95% owned by Mathias Döpfner.
They’re headquartered in Berlin. Döpfner is a Zionist (that is, he supports Israeli apartheid and thus its ongoing genocide on Palestinians) and met with Vance at the Munich Security Conference, calling for an end of isolation of the European far right.
Yeah, I think we might need a source that that’s not Politico. Fuck
That ia actually not even the worst part.
Axel Springer (note: there is another publisher named Springer that publishes scientific books) owns Bild und Welt, two of the most popular “news outlets” in Germany, and uses those papers’ popularity and reach to push the Overton Window to the right. Axel Springer is a main contributor to the political shift to the right and the rise of right wing extremism in Germany.
