What is Your Stance on European Union - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Polls on politics, news, current affairs and history.

What is your stance?

Pro-EU
9
21%
Pro-EU: Restructured
12
29%
Anti-EU
16
38%
Other
5
12%
#14903518
Pro-EU: I support the EU and want the project to continue on track as it is. With little alterations.

Pro-EU Reformist: I support the EU project in principle; however, I would like to see considerable reform in the structure of EU. Perhaps it is more centralized EU or federal. I will explain in comments section below, if I have the time.

Anti-EU: I do not support EU in current form or principle. I wish for its disbandment and return the independence of the nation currently composing it.

Image
Last edited by Albert on 06 Apr 2018 00:56, edited 2 times in total.
#14903521
I am all for the EU as a confederation, but it is obvious they intend to become a federation which I am totally against.

Edit: Sorry, let me add a qualification. I can’t fully support any country or group of countries that do not allow peaceful secession by only the votes of the area seceding. This would be expected in a confederation, but not a requirement, so the qualifier.
Last edited by One Degree on 06 Apr 2018 00:37, edited 1 time in total.
#14903525
Albert wrote:So you are Pro-EU: Reformed then, just like me.


I selected ‘other’ because I do not believe the EU can be altered that much from it’s current path. But, yes in theory ‘reformed’ would be correct.
#14903666
One Degree wrote:Edit: Sorry, let me add a qualification. I can’t fully support any country or group of countries that do not allow peaceful secession by only the votes of the area seceding. This would be expected in a confederation, but not a requirement, so the qualifier.


That's quite a qualification, few countries fulfill it.

The question is how those areas within countries that should be allowed to secede are defined. Are those the existing administrative divisions or something else? It gets kind of complicated.
#14903671
I want a complete turn around by the EU. The current EU leadership is committed to White genocide, the elimination of Europeans and European culture and the imposition of mono-cultural Sharia law. Their multiculturalism is a fake cover to break down our resistance, in the same way Lenin supported popular and democratic organisation to break down the professional government in order to create totalitarian one party rule.

The EU should be about defending European national cultures not destroying them. European security should be focused on defending our southern border. The EU should be a European state for European peoples, however the the Hindu, Sikh and Buddhist immigrants and their descendants who are already here should be treated with respect and equal citizenship. Their cultures should be treated with respect.
#14903678
Rugoz wrote:That's quite a qualification, few countries fulfill it.

The question is how those areas within countries that should be allowed to secede are defined. Are those the existing administrative divisions or something else? It gets kind of complicated.


Exactly. I think this is something a worthy UN would put together. There does have to be area and population guidelines or it is anarchy. The process should be clear cut and easy to understand but minor restrictions to prevent impetuous actions.
#14903684
I hope they continue to strangle the PIGS and continue to embrace Muslim integration until there is a pan-European right wing revolt. Hugo Boss uniforms for everyone!
#14903686
Why be against a federation? Are people against the US federation so against federations altogether? Or just not a European one?

A collective of small nations or a large nation? What is more influential? In a world of Superpowers, Europe can only be taken seriously together.
#14903691
B0ycey wrote:Why be against a federation? Are people against the US federation so against federations altogether? Or just not a European one?

A collective of small nations or a large nation? What is more influential? In a world of Superpowers, Europe can only be taken seriously together.


If your goal is to dominate all who disagree with you, then you are correct. If your goal is a world where the most people can find contentment, you are wrong.
#14903693
One Degree wrote:If your goal is to dominate all who disagree with you, then you are correct. If your goal is a world where the most people can find contentment, you are wrong.


I don't mind you being against Federations One Degree because you want to have independent city states, even in America. But if you are pro the United States, you should be pro the EU. Europe can only rid themselves of US influence and be truly independent if they unite together. And as big nations like China come along and take a big slice of global dominance, Europe, if they want to continue being respected globally, can't do it as individual small nations.
#14903695
B0ycey wrote:I don't mind you being against Federations One Degree because you want to have independent city states, even in America. But if you are pro the United States, you should be pro the EU. Europe can only rid themselves of US influence and be truly independent if they unite together. And as big nations like China come along and take a big slice of global dominance, Europe, if they want to continue being respected globally, can't do it as individual small nations.

I believe they can. Even a confederation usually gives control of international trade and defense to a central authority. They may even keep their troops separate but are united. Since my ultimate goal is a world confederation, I see the current conflicts as temporary stumbling blocks. The US and China will fragment. I believe it is inevitable. I believe the US should return to being a confederation.
#14903739
Anti of course. We fought two world wars to stop the bratwurst munchers taking Europe over and we have spat on the graves of the fallen by handing the entire continent over to them without a shot being fired. The EU is a hard right organisation and the working class should rise up and totally destroy it. Any attempt to resurrect it should be considered treason and punished as such.
#14903753
B0ycey wrote:as big nations like China come along and take a big slice of global dominance, Europe, if they want to continue being respected globally, can't do it as individual small nations.

That's a valid and practical point of view.

I support the EU as it is another step towards unity, which is the direction the world must move. I'm sure they can improve it so yes, restructure as needed.

Zam
#14904184
One Degree wrote:Exactly. I think this is something a worthy UN would put together. There does have to be area and population guidelines or it is anarchy. The process should be clear cut and easy to understand but minor restrictions to prevent impetuous actions.


What kind of process would be clear cut and easy to understand? In the case of the EU it's trivial, it's made up of individual countries.
Federations are also relatively straightforward, but an UN-mandated right to secession based on administrative regions would obviously lead to centralization in federations that do not respect that right.
#14904202
Rugoz wrote:What kind of process would be clear cut and easy to understand? In the case of the EU it's trivial, it's made up of individual countries.
Federations are also relatively straightforward, but an UN-mandated right to secession based on administrative regions would obviously lead to centralization in federations that do not respect that right.


There is no reason for it to be based upon existing administrative areas. I actually don’t think that would even be a good idea. Simply setting minimum and maximums on land area and perhaps population that can secede.
Perhaps a stipulation if that is impractical because the current country is too small, then secession is only possible if both halves meet the minimum. Ideally, I would disagree with very large areas of a country being allowed to secede. That is normally political rather than cultural and therefore does not really provide benefits to individuals.
#14904329
One Degree wrote:There is no reason for it to be based upon existing administrative areas. I actually don’t think that would even be a good idea. Simply setting minimum and maximums on land area and perhaps population that can secede.
Perhaps a stipulation if that is impractical because the current country is too small, then secession is only possible if both halves meet the minimum. Ideally, I would disagree with very large areas of a country being allowed to secede. That is normally political rather than cultural and therefore does not really provide benefits to individuals.


Minimum and maximum land area and population? That makes little sense to me. Culture? How is culture defined? I think this is going nowhere.
#14904349
Anti-EU. It's a corporatist-capitalist superstate plot. With Germany as inherent leader simply because of its economic might.

For the UK I support the 'Norway option' of the UK leaving most elements of the EU but staying in the Single Market. The UK needs to avoid EU trade barriers; a free trade agreement is not guaranteed.
“Iceworm”

All I did was repeat what you posted. If you ha[…]

Since you're incapable of explaining how it's n[…]

You would not believe what the truth is. As they[…]

Ukrainegate

...rebut with common sense and facts. T[…]