Yay or nay - should Britain vote to leave the EU?

[Morrigu]

With the referendum to decide whether Britian stay or leave the EU to happen in June just wondered what people's thoughts were?

I haven't heard one stay from any friends, colleagues or relatives - there not here!

[stui magpie]

NFI and to be honest, not a lot of care either. I don't know enough about the economics of it to say whether it's a good or bad call to leave, although it has always struck me as a "half pregnant" situation when different cultures and economies try to share a currency in the way it was set up.

[David]

I was hearing on the radio the other day that both the PM and opposition leader want to stay, but that there's been a large push from the backbench in the conservative party to make this an issue, and Cameron's gone along with it reluctantly.

Is it a bad thing if they leave? My instinctive response is yes, because economic interdependence is generally a good thing, boosts mutual interests, etc. But I haven't studied this in any depth.

[pietillidie]

It's a political stunt from Cameron and buddies to appease the UK tea party equivalents. Boris Johnson supporting a Brexit and going the other way is also a cheap stunt, because he can then pretend he was Mr. Cool Radical Britannia, when he's every bit a toff as Balloonhead.

I'm happy for there to be an "integration with tension" between the UK and the EU, because that helps keep each party more honest. The UK grossly overrates itself as an entity and still reaches for imperialism at the slightest hint of stress or challenge, while the EU has a cadre of elites up there with the most repugnant (as the wankery over Greece showed), and certain countries still have notorious 1950s bureaucracies.

At the same time, all are culturally likable in their various ways. Who doesn't love the diversity in unity of Europe?

And does anyone with foresight and sane motive think a retreat from unification makes sense on an increasingly-integrated planet when a healthy tension between the parties already exists?

Take one very simple example: Of course it's much better to have Germany, which understands Russia better and has a different set of incentives in regard to it, in a close union with France and the UK. Nothing about that lessens any one of the parties concerned, while it makes them more balanced as a whole.

More broadly, the idea that there is a risk on planet earth of humans losing group identity and mobbing tendencies is farcical. Just laughable psychosocial ignorance; the risk is always and ever the assertion of nationalism and the breakdown of integration incentives.

Also, the idea that greater protectionism will "protect" jobs at home is a complete furphy; mobile capital can either chase Eastern European labour in Eastern Europe, or it can utilise it at home. It makes no freaking difference to capital, while bottling up economies definitely makes them less competitive and competent, and in the long-run everyone poorer.

Instead of reducing mobility, let's make sure capital freaking pays its way when it benefits from a country's competitiveness. That's the root problem amplifying all other problems, and Tories love anything which draws attention away from it.

Furthermore, these idiots talk as if Brits don't travel. There are gawd knows how many Brits, such as myself, working overseas. WTF is an additional layer of bureaucracy going to add aside from useless cost? Countries are just going to develop individual sets of rules and more layers of local political nonsense to the process, making the task of being a mobile human in a world of mobile capital even more difficult.

(FYI, Ireland and the UK have a significantly separate arrangement which would exist regardless).

In sum, the notion of a Brexit is a combination of Tory political bluster, and nationalist, protectionist dickery; ease-of-movement and transfer makes everyone wealthier and safer overall, in the long-run. Reduce it, and the elites and their capital will maintain mobility, while the general population and the drooling nationalists, big-bad-world phobic, and conspiracy nuts seeking a Brexit will lose mobility.

[Morrigu]

^ so that would be a a nay then PTID

[Mugwump]

I�d say there are three large considerations, Morrigu :

Firstly, there is the economic question. Will Britain suffer a loss of inward investment, a slump in trade and a decline in attractiveness to skilled international people if it leaves the EU ? And to the extent that happens, is it offset by the reduction in subscription fees and the growth that may be accessible if Britain can chart its own course, free of a bloc that has a very mixed economic record? This is both highly technical and also inherently uncertain. It also involves a judgement about the relative efficacy of British institutions vs European ones.

Secondly, there is the long-term strategic question : how does the likely future of the EU fit with the future that Britain desires for itself ? The EU has an express commitment to �ever closer union�, which seems to mean a federal state. I cannot see the British accepting the status of a Victoria or New South Wales within a federated Europe. Unless you do buy that vision, then it seems to me hard to vote for continuing membership. You are buying a ticket on a train that is en route to a destination you do not wish to visit. Perhaps you can jump off the train as it nears the destination, but you will be a lot further away from where you want to be, at that point.

Third and finally, there is the �leap into the dark� question : what are you electing, if you vote �leave� ? This is a common argument of the �remain� side, and it may determine the outcome, since the British are by nature a fairly cautious people who will hold onto the status quo until it becomes completely untenable. When this is advanced, however, my heart always sinks. Australia does not seek to be a part of greater SE Asia. Canada does not seek to be part of the USA. New Zealand does not seek to be part of Australia. What is wrong with being an independent nation ? Most nations of the world seem to consider it the ideal.

You can probably tell from this that I will vote to leave. As a proud and patriotic Australian and a British citizen, I am happy to see Britain retain the independence of Australia, rather than become the New York of Europe. That said, I do not think that it�ll happen.

[Morrigu]

Hmmm I get the feeling that the migrant " crisis" may play a big part - a bit like " stop the boats" carried Rabbit over the line.

I don't for one moment understand the economic consequences but have always felt it was sorta like having a relationship with your sister/brother - not quite right especially as Britian kept the pound rather than converting to the Euro and like Eire opted out of the Schengen zone.

The arguments for and against should be interesting!

[pietillidie]

The real economic context here is one of the UK struggling to maintain the social and economic gains it has made over the last two decades. And those social gains came with a more open, flexible, and integrated UK.

The greatest risk facing UK by far is the risk of it returning to the two-tier classism, poverty and grime it was once notorious for. The fact that Brexiters talk as if they're defending the heavenly city, given just how unheavenly much of the UK is, shows just how detached their fantasies are from the UK as it actually is.

Further, the UK, not Europe, has just lost two wars which Europe strongly counselled it not to pursue. Indeed, the UK needs an EU which has been far more successful in shedding itself of old-world colonial fantasies.

Meanwhile, the pound did nothing to protect the UK from the GFC, demonstrating the illusory nature of the UK's "independence".

The Brexiter fantasy is not only one which risks a revival of classism and urban polarisation as the budget becomes harder and harder to balance, its "independence" will consist of pursuing the desires of multinational companies and clinging to the coattails of an increasingly flaky and unreliable US with weaker countervailing opinion and pressure being brought to bear from the EU.

Also, that last bit Mugwump wrote consists of very poor examples. Obviously, one can throw a blanket over stacks of countries in a small area in Europe - a region with a very bloody history of nationalist wars, and underlying nationalist sentiments which are never too far from the surface.

In contrast, Australia and NZ are miles from anywhere. How many other countries do you see on a map in their vicinity? And Australia's population centres are even further away than the borders of the map implies.

Yet, even then, both Australia and NZ are rightly increasing their integration with Asia in all kinds of ways, while both already have very close integration with each other and the Pacific Islands; we just don't hear much about the latter because those countries are so small.

Just imagine negotiating a Trans-Tasman agreement with 28 near-neighbours individually. Or, much a worse: dozens of Timor Gap Treaties with 28 near-neighbours individually.

And just how many countries are there on a map of North America? Like modern Australia and NZ, both the US and Canada are remote colonial implants without anything like the history of European hatred and warfare, so there's just no need for more than bilateral treaties.

Europe as a whole (and that includes the UK) clearly needs integrated mechanisms and structures of negotiation, with this need even more pronounced given Russia's resurgence, Turkey's rise and all kinds of common issues to deal with. The UK is a key part of that, with separation only increasing the chance of other powers and MNCs playing dangerous wedge politics in the region. Spats and disagreements in a context of a close relationship are positive and expected; spats and disagreements with less mutual incentive and responsibility can very quickly turn ugly.

The more you run your eye over the issue, the more dangerously fantasist the notion of a Brexit becomes for citizens of the UK, the nations of the EU, and Europe as a region.

[Mugwump]

[pietillidie]

^Discussing the ills of "elites" making decisions "far removed from the popular will", as if the UK is the last bastion of true representative democracy in Europe, lacking as it does control by "remote elites", really is the stuff of British half-hour comedies!

Yep, best to make a Brexit given it could take decades for Germany, Austria, Sweden, Finland, the Netherlands, and such, to reach the sheer quality of UK democratic life now they've lost control of their countries and have slipped so far behind that unstoppable benchmark of democratic achievement, the UK!

I mean, really Straight from the US Tea Party handbook, that one.

[Mugwump]

One more thing to say, Morrigu, and then Ill leave the discussion ; most decisions in politics that purport to be about destiny are not. As with individual humans, so with nations - your destiny often depends on how you react and adapt to your circumstances, as long as the circumstances are not utterly destructive.

In that regard, Britain has done pretty well within the EU, despite the ups and downs, and it is clearly a creative and vibrant country with many advantages. The EU is not presently a malignant force, though how it may evolve seems to me somewhat obscure. As long as it is not malign, the UK will probably do ok whether in or out, taking some good and some bad from either circumstance.

So the bottom line is that while I would vote to leave for the strategic reason outlined above - if it is good enough for Australia to be a sovereign nation it is good enough for Britain - it's not a matter to die in a ditch over. The zealots and certainty freaks on both sides will shout loudly and wave their arms, but fortunately the practical, quiet people with interests outside politics will have the final say.

[pietillidie]

^Your final word? We're not discussing the Ireland general election this coming Friday; the referendum's not for four months.

Perhaps a visit to all those failed, sovereignty-starved states of Europe to test your blog reading

[pietillidie]

(Morrigu, what are you thoughts on the election this Friday?).

[Culprit]

The only reason the UK joined the EU is to make sure it didn't work. The British have been fighting against a united Europe since Napoleon. He was seen as a Liberator with the one currency he introduced back then. Personally, I am all for them leaving as it will drop the value of the Euro and in saying that when it goes to vote I feel the NO will win.

[Mugwump]