European Union states reaffirm committment to united Europe

[JohnBrown1917]

National elections are about 5000 things, and while everyone agrees the eu is a pain it is not at the forefront of anyones' mind - definetly not during these elections.(it was hardly mentioned at all, with the turks going bananas etc.). All referendums' have ended negatively on the EU in the netherlands, simply put: they won't allow a vote (for over 15 years now), because they know the result.

But I should thank you; your arrogance in calling this sentiment bullshit is exactly the attitude that lays the foundation of why, eventually, we'll leave.

You're really overestimate how many people here want to leave.
But have fun with the 23 seats the EU leave parties have.


p.s We won't leave.

[Slant]

National elections are about 5000 things, and while everyone agrees the eu is a pain it is not at the forefront of anyones' mind - definetly not during these elections.(it was hardly mentioned at all, with the turks going bananas etc.). All referendums' have ended negatively on the EU in the netherlands, simply put: they won't allow a vote (for over 15 years now), because they know the result.

But I should thank you; your arrogance in calling this sentiment bullshit is exactly the attitude that lays the foundation of why, eventually, we'll leave.

So, first you want to tell us that anti-EU sentiments dominate the dutch politics and when we tell you that it's the opposite, EU is suddenly one of many topics? Gee, we could've told you that before... but you were too busy bitching about the EU to listen to reasonable arguments. A repeating pattern in this type of conversation, I'd like to add...

You won't leave. But you'll drone on about it for months and months, I'm sure.

[Deleted]

So, first you want to tell us that anti-EU sentiments dominate the dutch politics and when we tell you that it's the opposite, EU is suddenly one of many topics? Gee, we could've told you that before... but you were too busy bitching about the EU to listen to reasonable arguments. A repeating pattern in this type of conversation, I'd like to add...

You won't leave. But you'll drone on about it for months and months, I'm sure.

Interesting how you refer to yourself in plural, before going off about a non-existant causality based on conjecture and force of will. I did enjoy the too busy listning part (on a text forum no less).. That was quite amusing

I also dont see why youre being so defensive. Im merely pointing out that the european union wasnt at the forefront of the debate (for instance, the major winning party won last election by saying no more money to greece- a promise which they ovviously broke) and out of sheer coincidence the current greek crisis wasnt mentioned anywhere either pre election.

to burst your bubble further id point out that the only two parties against the union both grew immensely (pvdd went from 1 to 5 seats, pvv went from 15 to 20. Despite hardly campaigning.. Like.. At all)

And to stack some more of your faults here its worth pointing out that the 'pro euro winning party''s leader said 'if you love europe then dream of less, not more european union) in one of his latest speeches to the comission

[Malacrass]

We need to translate that into actual profit for the citizens. Invest into the south and the east. Especially the east has no reason not to catch up with the Western European nations except a lot of decades of communist mismanagement that we need to help eradicate instead of wishing them good luck and seeing money disappear in a swamp of corruption.

And how do you want to do that? Where and how would you invest?

Especially when it comes to nations with toxic anti EU governments? Governments that gladly take the money, while trash talking about the union every chance they get?
And by toxic I don't mean somewhat "rational" critics like the Brits, but nations like Poland threatening to block every EU legislation just because they didn't like the face of Donald Tusk?
Or Hungary with Orban at the top filling the pockets of his family with EU money, while translating any penalty he receives from the EU to a direct tax increase for his citizens?

It pains me to say it, but the east block simply isn't ready for the EU. And most of your (our) party thinks so as well. They are in purely for the money, nothing else matters. And I believe you need at least some romantic idea of a united EU if you want the project to work.

[Slant]

And how do you want to do that? Where and how would you invest?

Especially when it comes to nations with toxic anti EU governments? Governments that gladly take the money, while trash talking about the union every chance they get?
And by toxic I don't mean somewhat "rational" critics like the Brits, but nations like Poland threatening to block every EU legislation just because they didn't like the face of Donald Tusk?
Or Hungary with Orban at the top filling the pockets of his family with EU money, while translating any penalty he receives from the EU to a direct tax increase for his citizens?

It pains me to say it, but the east block simply isn't ready for the EU. And most of your (our) party thinks so as well. They are in purely for the money, nothing else matters. And I believe you need at least some romantic idea of a united EU if you want the project to work.

Well, invest into anti-corruption and information campaigns first. After that, invest into countries willing to play by the rules. And drop countries that'd rather live under Russian rule. It's not really a hard choice, tbh. The EU needs to toughen up, we have no time for slackers, we're shaping how Europe looks like in the 21st century. We've wasted enough time.

[Macaquerie]

Maybe as an outsider I'll never quite understand this, but what exactly are all of the anti-EU people looking to achieve? Before the EU, European borders were constantly shifting, there were gross inequalities in development and opportunity, and by far the best chance most people had to get ahead in life was to immigrate to the New World. And all of this was happening at a time when Europe was at the height of its power geopolitically, a status it certainly doesn't have anymore. What is the point of national sovereignty when you are completely isolated and surrounded by countries that you refuse to cooperate with? What chance does a small country like the Netherlands deal with the likes of the USA or China on an equal footing?

[Kallisto]

Maybe as an outsider I'll never quite understand this, but what exactly are all of the anti-EU people looking to achieve? Before the EU, European borders were constantly shifting, there were gross inequalities in development and opportunity, and by far the best chance most people had to get ahead in life was to immigrate to the New World. And all of this was happening at a time when Europe was at the height of its power geopolitically, a status it certainly doesn't have anymore. What is the point of national sovereignty when you are completely isolated and surrounded by countries that you refuse to cooperate with? What chance does a small country like the Netherlands deal with the likes of the USA or China on an equal footing?

For the insane like Dribbles it's to screw over "Zie Germans." because in his mind they're still a bunch of Nazis.
For others it's a push back against the inevitable globalization because they can't be bothered to compete in a 21st century market.
Some believe that somehow the UK is the Empire with the Super Power forgetting that lie was shown to be untrue during Suez crisis.

Nothing logical in their choice really.

[Mormolyce]

I still can't get over a bunch of right wingers complaining about globalisation.

[Cybran]

I still can't get over a bunch of right wingers complaining about globalisation.

Why? Nationalism was established in the 19th century as the opposite of Imperialism. Globalism is today's Imperialism, so it's natural that Nationalism would be against both.

[Mormolyce]

Why? Nationalism was established in the 19th century as the opposite of Imperialism. Globalism is today's Imperialism, so it's natural that Nationalism would be against both.

Everything you just said is wrong, but okay.

[Raakel]

EU should have dropped expansion years before along with Nato expanding further east. Instead of collecting as many countries as possible they should have focused on building a solid and wealthy core. In it's current state there are too many differences between north and south + eastern states. I'd rather have had some of the countries like Bulgaria for example join a trade union with the core EU and then get closer while they progress towards EU standards in terms of economy and living standard. Many countries joined like 20 years too early but I guess it was made under geo/stategical influence. It would also have created a buffer between Nato and Russia and might not have Russia forced to act like it does now.

[Slant]

Maybe as an outsider I'll never quite understand this, but what exactly are all of the anti-EU people looking to achieve? Before the EU, European borders were constantly shifting, there were gross inequalities in development and opportunity, and by far the best chance most people had to get ahead in life was to immigrate to the New World. And all of this was happening at a time when Europe was at the height of its power geopolitically, a status it certainly doesn't have anymore. What is the point of national sovereignty when you are completely isolated and surrounded by countries that you refuse to cooperate with? What chance does a small country like the Netherlands deal with the likes of the USA or China on an equal footing?

To answer your first and last question. Nothing and none. Most anti-EU people don't even know why they're anti-EU. They get told some bullshit fantasy and that's what they go with, even if it doesn't take into account how the EU actually works. And considering that China and the USA are the two hardest trade negotiators, The Netherlands would get much worse deals than the EU can muscle out of those two.

[Kalis]

Maybe as an outsider I'll never quite understand this, but what exactly are all of the anti-EU people looking to achieve? Before the EU, European borders were constantly shifting, there were gross inequalities in development and opportunity, and by far the best chance most people had to get ahead in life was to immigrate to the New World. And all of this was happening at a time when Europe was at the height of its power geopolitically, a status it certainly doesn't have anymore. What is the point of national sovereignty when you are completely isolated and surrounded by countries that you refuse to cooperate with? What chance does a small country like the Netherlands deal with the likes of the USA or China on an equal footing?

It depends on the person and where they are from.

In Britain, for some it is the increase in cheap labour competing for employment, for others the move toward a federal European state rather than a trading block, many felt the membership fees were a poor investment, etc. Reasons are varied just like in most political debates.

There are always positives and negatives, I believed that the positives outweighed the negatives and voted accordingly, more felt differently and thus we have Brexit. Beware of anyone claiming there are no negatives or positives to EU membership.

[JohnBrown1917]

I still can't get over a bunch of right wingers complaining about globalisation.

Far right*

The center right are the most Pro EU here.

[Raakel]

My guess is also that people (especially in UK and US) wanted something different but didn't actually knew what they wanted. So any alternative with some kind of marketing got popular even though the outcome wasn't quite clear. It's more a desire to change things for change sake rather than rational thinking. In itself it doesn't have to be a bad thing as long as you are willing to alter and adopt your plans if you took a wrong turn. The election of Trump and Brexit could have also been a well deserved kick in the butt for EU. History will tell...

But there's a deep irony that the motherland of capitalism (US) claims it didn't got "fair deals" and is now trying to attack it's selfmade issues with pretectionism and socialistic actions. Cheep chinese and mexican production / labour was welcome for years and is one reason which led to the current situation. There's a simple lesson: don't sell out your industry, just being a think tank, Silicon Valley and a big stock exchange isn't enough. Same goes for Britain.

[Acidbaron]

My guess is also that people (especially in UK and US) wanted something different but didn't actually knew what they wanted. So any alternative with some kind of marketing got popular even though the outcome wasn't quite clear. It's more a desire to change things for change sake rather than rational thinking. In itself it doesn't have to be a bad thing as long as you are willing to alter and adopt your plans if you took a wrong turn. The election of Trump and Brexit could have also been a well deserved kick in the butt for EU. History will tell...

But there's a deep irony that the motherland of capitalism (US) claims it didn't got "fair deals" and is now trying to attack it's selfmade issues with pretectionism and socialistic actions. Cheep chinese and mexican production / labour was welcome for years and is one reason which led to the current situation. There's a simple lesson: don't sell out your industry, just being a think tank, Silicon Valley and a big stock exchange isn't enough. Same goes for Britain.

We didn't trade in a manufacturing industry for a more high tech one, we traded it in globally sadly for a large financial one. That's why we are now have workers competing with people in China and elsewhere, profit margins.