The world is a messy place. In the grand scheme of things, nation states are a fairly new phenomena and we are yet to understand all of their downsides. One that has been emerging for several decades is that large segments of the electorates in all most all democracies have been becoming more alienated and are finding it more difficult to the dynamics of their own governments or international relations. What they know is they want change and, unfortunately, they are very susceptible to the arguments of politicians who are telling them that if we just return to the good old days, everything will be okay again. Well, everything wasn't okay in the good old days and, ironically, the people who are buying this line will probably suffer the most if they get what they want.
It's not written anywhere that 7 billion people can populate a planet and everything will go smoothly. It takes courage to be hopeful and optimistic about the future in the face of turmoil. It takes courage to show resolve when challenges are mounting and outcomes are uncertain. And, it takes courage to turn away from cynicism when folly and foolishness seem to be drowning out our public discourse. However this vote goes, and similar votes in other countries, let's hope we all can find a little more courage and pay a little more attention to the concerns the "other side."
It's not written anywhere that 7 billion people can populate a planet and everything will go smoothly. It takes courage to be hopeful and optimistic about the future in the face of turmoil. It takes courage to show resolve when challenges are mounting and outcomes are uncertain. And, it takes courage to turn away from cynicism when folly and foolishness seem to be drowning out our public discourse. However this vote goes, and similar votes in other countries, let's hope we all can find a little more courage and pay a little more attention to the concerns the "other side."
2
I am feeling the neo-liberal railroading, NYT. If you are for Remain, you must be a racist nationalist. I would like to hear some thoughtful arguments as to why Remain might actually be sensible and not reactionary. Greater local democracy and control over domestic policy perhaps? More determination over how an economy is run and the distribution of benefits, as opposed to transnational global financiers sucking away most of the wealth? Surely it is possible to pursue Brexit, be a self-determining democratic nation, while not being "isolationist"? I am hoping for a bit less fear-mongering and a bit more nuance, not: "Trump wants it, it must be bad!".
10
June 17, 2016
There is no exit – J P Sartre – as well to get out you have to get in and be part of the solution to connect to the integration of shared strengths. There is not a new philosophy for Britain’s decision it just believing in the strength of – being part of the solution always mitigates all else- with history as witness for the better united to lessening the obstacles and unfamiliar path not to be overwhelmed for the levers of the EU will gain for the region, the continent and with pride for a better life understandings on records.
Jja Manhattan N.Y.
There is no exit – J P Sartre – as well to get out you have to get in and be part of the solution to connect to the integration of shared strengths. There is not a new philosophy for Britain’s decision it just believing in the strength of – being part of the solution always mitigates all else- with history as witness for the better united to lessening the obstacles and unfamiliar path not to be overwhelmed for the levers of the EU will gain for the region, the continent and with pride for a better life understandings on records.
Jja Manhattan N.Y.
2
More scaremongering by reactionaries in progressive clothing. Britain's survived for well over a thousand years as an independent nation. Leaving the EU won't harm it. On the contrary, it will create opportunities, not the least of which will be renegotiated trade pacts that most likely favor the Brits. After all, a cogent argument among the "Leaves" is that, as a stronger member of the EU, its currently subsidizing and being exploited by the weaker, less disciplined members (i.e., Greece and just about everyone else except Germany and the Netherlands). Any short-term discomfort during the transition is well worth the longer term benefits of independence.
10
What is wrong with going your own way?
Brits aren't sheep are they?
I admire their spirit.
Brits aren't sheep are they?
I admire their spirit.
6
Will the EU survive a British exit?
2
Keep UK safe from terrorists and illegal aliens intent in invading island
3
I'm voting in next week but not out of any great love for the EU. As the article correctly states the undemocratic nature of the EU and their utterly incompetent handling of the Greek economic crisis ans the migration crisis have made it attractive to leave. I think our population growth is also an issue. Migration has made the UK what it is today over millennia not just the last decade but the rate of recent population growth is, I think. alarming. Free movement needs to be tailored to the ability of a country to absorb and maintain something of its demographic geography, urban space and rural space. I have become convinced that we owe a commitment to Europe but it needs reform as well.
2
It's the best thing England can do to avoid being forced into the Caliphate that is coming to Europe.
3
"...A nostalgia for a past when nations decided their own fates..." Indeed, and there's never been any citizen consultation about abdicating national sovereignty in any European country. Corporations and their proxies are essentially running the world and bypassing citizens altogether. National constitutions are being trampled on and a majority of people reject this state of affairs. The current path is unsustainable and unless democratic institutions are reestablished so that citizens can decide, there will full scale trouble ahead. Whether one agrees or not, that is what Brexit, Le Pen and the rest are all about.
6
"There is no argument that the European Union is a flawed institution. Its dysfunction has been on display in its fitful handling of the Greek debt and refugee crises, its bureaucracy is pathetically slow to recognize or correct its failings and it often acts like an out-of-touch and undemocratic elite."
Absolutely. But this description applies as much to the U.S., Russia, China and the whole of Latin America as it does to the E.U..
Going it alone will leave Britain alone, and the Scots may even finally leave and cause Britain to shrink further.
Absolutely. But this description applies as much to the U.S., Russia, China and the whole of Latin America as it does to the E.U..
Going it alone will leave Britain alone, and the Scots may even finally leave and cause Britain to shrink further.
5
This editorial and Roger Cohen's column both talk about the bureaucratic and undemocratic aspects of the EU. Yet neither piece, both opposing Brexit, offer a single word on what to do about those things. This editorial even goes so far as to suggest an exit from the EU will require Britain to "write their own protections, in areas from the environment to banking."
You mean like we do?
If those arguing against Brexit can't suggest solutions to the problems they acknowledge, how are skeptics to be persuaded?
You mean like we do?
If those arguing against Brexit can't suggest solutions to the problems they acknowledge, how are skeptics to be persuaded?
8
The fear of economic collapse is as overblown as that of immigration. The issues are clearly one of nationalism, however expressed, and globalism, however defined. The UK will remain in the UN and in NATO. The experiment in masking national differences has gone too far, and perhaps too fast, for a great many people in several EU countries. The Euro zone disaster is a primary example, as is the unresponsive continental "bureaucrazy" for which the EU is a source of personal and institutional income and power.
It is indicative that Cameron failed to get real reforms, perhaps because the arrogant EU really did not believe that the UK voters will vote for the leave option. Now there is panic because of the fear of a domino effect. What is missing from the equation is the prospect of Scotland and Northern Ireland leaving the UK because of expectations of generous regional development assistance from the EU and the opportunity to continue out migration.
In passim: Will Ireland veto EU membership for Northern Ireland because their priority is national unification?
It is indicative that Cameron failed to get real reforms, perhaps because the arrogant EU really did not believe that the UK voters will vote for the leave option. Now there is panic because of the fear of a domino effect. What is missing from the equation is the prospect of Scotland and Northern Ireland leaving the UK because of expectations of generous regional development assistance from the EU and the opportunity to continue out migration.
In passim: Will Ireland veto EU membership for Northern Ireland because their priority is national unification?
2
The editorial fails to understand the main constituency of the Leavers - i.e. the industrial 'rust-belt' of Midlands and the North. We see industry after industry shuttering partially because of globalization and partially because of Santa Thatcher's economic philosophy. The unemployment in North East is around 8% and economy of Old York is in shambles (pun intended).
Is it the fault of EU - maybe not - maybe EU may be a solution. But they have found a 'strawman' OR decided on a nihilist trend to annihilate the existing order. They have nothing to loose!
Scotland and Northern Ireland may counter on the side of Remain. They may succeed or they may fail. But the truth - as also with US - is that we cannot move to a tertiary economy leaving manufacturing behind.
Is it the fault of EU - maybe not - maybe EU may be a solution. But they have found a 'strawman' OR decided on a nihilist trend to annihilate the existing order. They have nothing to loose!
Scotland and Northern Ireland may counter on the side of Remain. They may succeed or they may fail. But the truth - as also with US - is that we cannot move to a tertiary economy leaving manufacturing behind.
3
First, the NYT weighed in against Trump. Then Brexit. Barrages of opinion by "eminent" personalities, huge doses of Upshotted statistics, sooth-saying, fear-mongering, every trick in the book, then some. Both campaigns soundly ignored, both doomed to fail dramatically. The way this newspaper has repeatedly over-estimated it's influence on politics, under-estimated the intelligence of its readers and short-changed its now fast-depleting stock of influence, is the real story here.
There's still world-class reporting going-on, but not at the Opinion pages, which serve more mostly to snooze or amuse. Have fistful of salt handy. Good night.
There's still world-class reporting going-on, but not at the Opinion pages, which serve more mostly to snooze or amuse. Have fistful of salt handy. Good night.
8
All of these NY Times editorials against a Brexit are basing their assumptions on the immediate political past based on old thinking. To understand what's going on it's important to take in the bigger picture in terms of world history: what we are experiencing is what anthropologists have predicted for a long time, we are experiencing a biological tipping point with over-population. Britain has had to absorb hundreds of thousands of Eastern Europeans at a time when it has been dealing with its own native population pressures. Now here come the migrants from the Middle East and Africa. This dramatic influx coming into a country already over-populated has taken things to a boiling point, a crisis felt viscerally by Britain's citizens.
The NY Times and these politicians sitting on their pedestals are completely ignoring this, they don't know how to bring this into their narrative. Brits do not want to become a European India or Indonesia socially, where all standards of humanity fall into a putrid gutter. By letting in the countless millions of migrants Europe is moving inexorably in terms of social standards to a Brazil, Venezuela, Kenya, or the Southeast Asian countries. With the Brexit vote Britain hopes to stop this. The human catastrophe of exploding population growth is behind all of this (it helps to explain Trump, for example), and media organs like the NY Times are in complete denial because confronting this reality is too much for them to handle.
The NY Times and these politicians sitting on their pedestals are completely ignoring this, they don't know how to bring this into their narrative. Brits do not want to become a European India or Indonesia socially, where all standards of humanity fall into a putrid gutter. By letting in the countless millions of migrants Europe is moving inexorably in terms of social standards to a Brazil, Venezuela, Kenya, or the Southeast Asian countries. With the Brexit vote Britain hopes to stop this. The human catastrophe of exploding population growth is behind all of this (it helps to explain Trump, for example), and media organs like the NY Times are in complete denial because confronting this reality is too much for them to handle.
5
Why is this the business of the NYT Editorial Board? Butt out, and let the British electorate speak. Isn't there enough chaos here in the US to comment on?
13
The European Union is where 13 American colonies were under the Articles of Confederation which required unanimous agreement to raise revenues and was therefore unworkable. Thanks to Rogue Island that never happened and 9 of the 13 states were required to ratify the US Constitution to form a more perfect union. As much as I would like to see states like Texas leave the US ("Txexit") these United States are still better off together and working towards a more perfect union. Don't quit the EU England - work to make it more perfect.
2
The bookies are giving 66% Remain, 34% Leave. For the past few years in the UK and the USA they have been quite reliable vs Pollsters, and more so in Britain.
But seriously, independently of the outcome a deeply divided country will be the result with whatever consequences, social and economical. If the outcome is for Leave, I'll bet on Scotland and Northern Ireland to Leave the Leavers and ask to join the EU.
Saluti
But seriously, independently of the outcome a deeply divided country will be the result with whatever consequences, social and economical. If the outcome is for Leave, I'll bet on Scotland and Northern Ireland to Leave the Leavers and ask to join the EU.
Saluti
7
If the Scots hope into bed with the EU on the rebound, it would be one of the greatest rebound mistakes ever....
1
Unfortunate that many comments on this subject are basically advocating forms of isolationism. Even back in the days when the world seemed really big and easy to imagine as a cluster of isolated human societies, purposeful isolationism has failed. This slow acceptance is not unlike human-caused climate disruption. Greater global interconnection may require the passing of another generation or two before enough people and governments regard isolationism as the losing proposition that it is.
6
Clearly, you do not have any concept all of what isolationism really means. This has little do with that. In order to belong to a massive trading block, the U.S. had to give up control of its currency, what would Americans think? Long before the EU, trading occurred and the EU was designed to make that situation theoretically more efficient. Ultimately, with varying degrees of size and strengths of various economies within that union and the immigration issues that have now unfolded it has proved to be, at best, problematic.
When the bankers and Wall Street are deciding what is best for a country, then we should be, automatically, doing the opposite.
When the bankers and Wall Street are deciding what is best for a country, then we should be, automatically, doing the opposite.
6
EU meddles in stupid details in people's lives. The leadership is full of people, who have no idea, what freedom is and why people need to decide independently about their affairs.
The big things are not in order at all. Such as defence.
The big things are not in order at all. Such as defence.
3
The biggest divider of EU is the 28 different languages. This means that only some elite actually governs and decides of things. EU is not a democratic body. People need to learn to govern their own areas and learn democracy, which is disapearing even from the older democracies, not to mention eastern European countries, that had lost their way during the communist times.
It seems like a mess for Britain to leave EU, but necessary. The entire Union will disolve and people will have power in their own countries. Independence is a valuable thing to gain.
It seems like a mess for Britain to leave EU, but necessary. The entire Union will disolve and people will have power in their own countries. Independence is a valuable thing to gain.
11
Why not make the EU body responsive to all Europeans? Why can Europeans vote for their favorite singer but not the EU representatives?
13
In demonstrating its adversion to the bureaucrats in Belgium, the UK risks becoming another Belgium, albiet one without much influence on the EU.
1
However flawed, the EU is an attempt to interconnect our world in an orderly manner. Seeking to re-establish the kind of "sovereignty" advocated by Brexit supporters is antithetical to the evolution of human global society and the fact that all of humanity is in this world order together. Like many in the U.S. have realized, the phrase, "Make America Great Again" is code for a return to ways of life that were and are incompatible with human progress on a global scale.
10
Baloney
9
An America first, Brexit or any other isolationist economic policy would make sense if you are America whose currency still serves as the world's defacto reserve currency and whose economy all of the world wants to trade with. It would be completely suicidal if you are a small Island of mainland Europe whose global economic footprint has shrunk considerably since the colonial arrangements and unfettered access to resources in Africa and Asia fell like dominoes over half a century ago.
5
It's as if the NYT is having an anti-Brexit blitzkrieg kind of day or week.
If the bankers, financiers and other money changers are all against Brexiting, this is a sure sign to Brexit.
Poor elites may have to deal with having a few less million pounds in their already over stuffed pockets.
If the bankers, financiers and other money changers are all against Brexiting, this is a sure sign to Brexit.
Poor elites may have to deal with having a few less million pounds in their already over stuffed pockets.
23
It is not just banks and financiers. It is everyone - overwhelmingly artists, scientists, small business corporations and so on have come out in facour of Stay, plus the Labour party (and half of the Conservative).
The only ones in favour of Brexit are Farage and his xenophobic movement, Boris Johnson who wants Cameron's job, and a few others, leveraging the "make Britain great again" mirage (such as the famously high quality tabloids). Unfortunately they are making a lot of noise, and convincing a lot of unhappy people (often with blatant lies).
The only ones in favour of Brexit are Farage and his xenophobic movement, Boris Johnson who wants Cameron's job, and a few others, leveraging the "make Britain great again" mirage (such as the famously high quality tabloids). Unfortunately they are making a lot of noise, and convincing a lot of unhappy people (often with blatant lies).
May be Britain wants to exit Europe and join US as its 51st state. Not a bad thing at all. But once they join our union we should make English as primary spoken language not their current language they speak ( whatever it is). We already have lot of non-English speaking people in this country we don't want more of them. I am sure President Trump will make sure of that. :)
5
Let us summarize: This country is feeling very nationalistic, and this is manifesting itself in hating of foreigners and other people that are "different". This country feels that the very rightous rules in the EU concerning the environment and such are holding back their economy. This country is feeding this rubbish to the lowest educated. This country is America light.
12
not hatred of foreigners, but hatred of moslem terrorists and losing culture by having to absorb thousands of migrants who have no intention of assimiliating
3
The EU was sold to the British people in 1973, and with the subsequent referendum in 1975, as an economic community. It is not that any more. Neither is it United States of Europe, which is what it could and should have become. Britain has only ever been half committed, by not joining the Euro nor the Schengen area (elimination of borders). Britain has suffered due to restriction placed on them which have destroyed their historical links to other nations, primarily the former Commonwealth, which was largely a free trade area. The fifth largest economy in the world is not going to be destroyed by "going it alone". Norway and Switzerland are doing very well outside the EU, with Norway enjoying possibly the highest standard of living in the world..
There is no way the US would tolerate the external controls placed on it that Britain suffers from Brussels.
There is no way the US would tolerate the external controls placed on it that Britain suffers from Brussels.
29
If the Brits vote to leave the EU then they deserve the economic hardship that will ensue. Fair enough. What bothers me is that world economy is now so interlinked that many others elsewhere on the planet will feel the economic reverberations, including Americans (although admittedly far less so than the Brits).
Brexit will produce only losers.
Brexit will produce only losers.
6
globalisation has produced th losers
wake up
wake up
13
Let Britain go it alone. Let the EU continue to dominate Europe. Britain has never been part of Europe - America is Britain's offspring, and we have Britain's back no matter the outcome of Brexit. And who even knows if the referendum will take place next week? As Bobby Burns pontificated to a mouse: "the best-laid schemes of mice and men gang aft agley".
6
If the Remain campaign has anything going for it, it's these 3 who want to leave: Marine Le Pen, Nigel Farage and Donald Trump. What else needs to be said?
5
Susan:
You are correct "What else needs to be said."
You are correct "What else needs to be said."
2
Britain has the world's fifth largest economy, the fourth largest military, and has a permanent seat on the UN. However, in the considered opinion of the NYT it should give up its independence and accept that being run by a bunch of clueless bureaucrats in Brussels is the best it can hope for. A lot of Britons don't see their future that way. They don't want to be part of a political union of 508 million people with whom they have little in common.
25
The Brits gave up campaigning for a couple of days out of respect for Ms. Cox. The editorial board, alas, found itself unable to follow their wise example.
28
It must be truly insulting to some 50% of Britain to be told to join the EU. Only some 75 years ago they were the Colonial Power House of the World, they saved themselves from Hitler as opposed to any European country, and were the essential stepping stone for America to add its weight to halting WW2. Being told now to join the EU or else is an insult to history and makes a mockery of their valid concerns about the future of the EU. Getting on board a sinking ship, even in the best of times, never works out.
17
The EU is an incredibly successful endeavour. Prosperity, opportunity, diversity, tolerance, culture, democracy and capitalism all together. Think that's funny? Just remember 1939 and the preceding couple thousand years.
Yet we have lost track of how amazing Europe is and inflate all the negatives. Painful to Watch. Pathetic
Yet we have lost track of how amazing Europe is and inflate all the negatives. Painful to Watch. Pathetic
9
Is it successful ? It's not the finished article, it's still to become the entity it wants to be. At the moment it's dysfunctional and utterly opaque. It hasn't dealt well with all the current crisees facing it and gives the impression that trying to improve and change the E.U.s workings is all but impossible. Now, I'm saying this as one who favours staying in the E.U. Yet I totally sympathise with those, and there are many, that want out. And calling those 'pathetic' for doing so really is head in the sand stuff. There really are very powerful arguments for leaving - ignore this at your peril. If Europe is so deaf and intransigent to change then God help it. Yet the concerns of Britain aren't just limited to itself, it's Europe wide, this is undeniable. The only difference being we are actually the only ones able to have a say on it. If there's a positive to the destabilising effect of possible Brexit then it's Europe being shaken out of its self congratulatory conceit. Because a lot of work still needs to be done.
1
The most influential argument against Brexit may be that Trump and Le Pen are in favor of it.
11
In a nut shell.
4
Brit newspapers attacked mr Obama for coming to UK and telling them to stay in the EU..............................
Its so much easier to throw torches and burn down a building that draw hammers and build one.
I'm amazed at how many people want to rip down the house of EU because some of the people living in the building are noisy, and they are angry the roof of the garage leaks a bit in the rain and no one has fixed it yet.
I'm amazed at how many people want to rip down the house of EU because some of the people living in the building are noisy, and they are angry the roof of the garage leaks a bit in the rain and no one has fixed it yet.
2
How many of us here in the U.S. can imagine staying in such an economic union with other countries adjacent to us? How many of us can even imagine becoming part of such an arrangement? Issues of autonomy, liberty and identity may not sell cars (or whatever) but they mean a lot more to us than financial advantage. Would we want the Canadians and Mexicans (combined!) having some ultimate say in how we handled our immigration? And just why in the devil is Britain's decision in such a matter any of our business? I suspect if the shoe were on the other foot, that the Brits would have the decency and good form to refrain from making overly familiar strident suggestions. It's their country and their vote-- such matters of independent sovereignty supposedly meant a great deal to us some 240 years ago.
22
Therefore I am for the EU, but a deeply reformed one. As currently some faceless EU bureaucrats with the German chancellor and the French president are deciding the fate of 508 million people.
And regarding the "cannot turn back the clock" please give me a break. We can do however we'd like, depends just about our will.
And regarding the "cannot turn back the clock" please give me a break. We can do however we'd like, depends just about our will.
11
Since when did the editorial board start writing astrological forecasts?
16
i cannot understand how Boris Johnson and the like find that rules about bananas are so odious that they would throw away the mechanism that has prevented the deaths of millions of Europeans a la WW I/II. I mean, it's banana inconvenience vs fighting the Nazis, right? It's telling that this comes shortly after the death of England's last WWI vet and at a time when the government is in the hands of people that have never known war. Complete nutters.
3
That's a very simplistic analysis.
4
Obviously The Times would be anti-Brexit to the max. Like all liberals and Democrats The Times is in favor of a one world order where government controls every aspect of life. Individual countries, cultures and customs are outdated. Better to let the mass illegal migration of the poor and destitute of the Middle East destroy Great Britain as they are destroying continental Europe.
36
Government has always controlled every aspect of life. Whether it is control by the tribal chief and shaman, the local village mayor and bishop, or the nation state. To think that things can be arranged otherwise is a fantasy that is particularly popular in some realms of American thought.
3
"..a nostalgia for the past when nations decided their own fate."
Is the NYT editorial board really this obtuse?
Is the NYT editorial board really this obtuse?
16
What we're seeing here is an outbreak of Little Englanderism, of the famous apocryphal headline "Fog in the Channel; Continent cut off". The British have lost their Empire and have never come to terms with cohabitation with the funny foreigners on the other side of the Channel /La Manche. They should really ditch "God save the Queen" and use Flanders and Swann as the new National Anthem
The English, the English, the English are best!
I couldn't give tuppence for all of the rest.
The rest?
The rottenest bits of these islands of ours
We've left in the hands of three unfriendly powers
Examine the Irishman, Welshman or Scot
You'll find he's a stinker, as likely as not!
But Flanders and Swann were joking (I hope).
The English, the English, the English are best!
I couldn't give tuppence for all of the rest.
The rest?
The rottenest bits of these islands of ours
We've left in the hands of three unfriendly powers
Examine the Irishman, Welshman or Scot
You'll find he's a stinker, as likely as not!
But Flanders and Swann were joking (I hope).
Why is it dangerous to go it alone? The UK has done ok for the last 2000 years thank you and I am sure we will manage just fine.
What is your problem? As for Obama urging us to stay. We all know it nothing to do with the welfare of the UK. You can bet you left leg that it is all about what’s in it for him.
As for all the actors and washed up presidents that keep rolling in to “advise” us to stay, save your breath.
Don’t tell us the accept something that you would not accept yourself. We are sick of being lectured at when all you want us to do is become part of a dictatorship. You wouldn’t want it. Neither do we.
Give us a break will you.
What is your problem? As for Obama urging us to stay. We all know it nothing to do with the welfare of the UK. You can bet you left leg that it is all about what’s in it for him.
As for all the actors and washed up presidents that keep rolling in to “advise” us to stay, save your breath.
Don’t tell us the accept something that you would not accept yourself. We are sick of being lectured at when all you want us to do is become part of a dictatorship. You wouldn’t want it. Neither do we.
Give us a break will you.
7
EU needs to be completely reformed. In the long run, unifying countries with so different socio-economic status and welfare systems will never work.
UK however is one of the countries least ready for exit. Of it's really weak export (only half of Germany's) nearly 50% is going to other EU countries. In the case of Brexit, lost exports and depreciation of the Sterling will push back the budget deficit again to +£100bn.
The Brexit group is a colourful collection of anti-immigration blue collar workers, well educated people still dreaming about the "empire" and opportunists. If there is a leave majority next week it will be difficult for Mr Cameron to stay on. His "nemesis" Mr Boris Johnson may "finally" become PM but leading a project he really doesn't believe in. First steps will be unpopular cuts in the +£200bn/year benefits budget (not including pensions) and the free access to the +£110bn/year free healthcare provided by NHS. Alternatively a dramatic tax increase.
Interesting times indeed.
UK however is one of the countries least ready for exit. Of it's really weak export (only half of Germany's) nearly 50% is going to other EU countries. In the case of Brexit, lost exports and depreciation of the Sterling will push back the budget deficit again to +£100bn.
The Brexit group is a colourful collection of anti-immigration blue collar workers, well educated people still dreaming about the "empire" and opportunists. If there is a leave majority next week it will be difficult for Mr Cameron to stay on. His "nemesis" Mr Boris Johnson may "finally" become PM but leading a project he really doesn't believe in. First steps will be unpopular cuts in the +£200bn/year benefits budget (not including pensions) and the free access to the +£110bn/year free healthcare provided by NHS. Alternatively a dramatic tax increase.
Interesting times indeed.
2
I've read several Brexit articles now but not one has managed to translate the promised economic ruin into terms that would be more ruinous to current Britons who already can't afford to live anywhere there is a job available, or are being priced out of places their families had grown up.
If you asked them, they would probably tell you that their economic outlook is pretty ruinous already.
Until someone is willing to get down off their "negotiate its own trade pacts with other nations" high horse and realize that, much like America, British economic success in toto is not the same thing as British economic success for the majority of voters then--guess what? You're getting a Brexit.
If you asked them, they would probably tell you that their economic outlook is pretty ruinous already.
Until someone is willing to get down off their "negotiate its own trade pacts with other nations" high horse and realize that, much like America, British economic success in toto is not the same thing as British economic success for the majority of voters then--guess what? You're getting a Brexit.
11
US analysts cannot understand why British people would want out of such a great deal.
But the article doesn't mention that the EU opened the door to virtually unlimited immigration into the UK. People have been moving to the UK from poorer European countries that the rate of 500,000 a year. And that is in the midst of a housing crisis.
Americans would not be prepared to accept any trade deal with Mexico which included the right to immigrate in unlimited numbers.
Why does the NY Times expect the UK to be happy with such a deal?
But the article doesn't mention that the EU opened the door to virtually unlimited immigration into the UK. People have been moving to the UK from poorer European countries that the rate of 500,000 a year. And that is in the midst of a housing crisis.
Americans would not be prepared to accept any trade deal with Mexico which included the right to immigrate in unlimited numbers.
Why does the NY Times expect the UK to be happy with such a deal?
14
We don't know what Britain's urge is. We do have a sense of what a large group of English would like--to leave. We don't know what the Scots want, and this editorial doesn't even mention Northern Ireland. For shame.
It has always seemed to me that the English never, en masse, accepted themselves as British. That term became official in the early 18th C. Many viewed it as a way to con Scots into taking more than their fair share of the load of running colonies and empire, running them and dying for them. The word itself describes ancient Celts. While many refer to a Gallic spirit in France, no one calls them Gauls.
Elsewhere in the NYT, there is a fine article on implications for the border that still separates the Irish Republic from UK. At least someone is paying attention.
It has always seemed to me that the English never, en masse, accepted themselves as British. That term became official in the early 18th C. Many viewed it as a way to con Scots into taking more than their fair share of the load of running colonies and empire, running them and dying for them. The word itself describes ancient Celts. While many refer to a Gallic spirit in France, no one calls them Gauls.
Elsewhere in the NYT, there is a fine article on implications for the border that still separates the Irish Republic from UK. At least someone is paying attention.
2
If we're lucky, the British voters will have exactly the same reaction to your advice that American gun owners do. New York Times, you've gone off the rails. Soon enough, you'll be out of business.
9
I wonder how many British voters will read this editorial. What's the point? Would Trump supporters see the light if the Financial Times came out against him?
1
Democracy is such a messy thing. Try as you might to explain how what you want (open borders, "free trade", etc.) is best for workers, but they just don't seem to be buying it.
5
So says the folks who thought NAFTA was such a wonderful idea for American workers since 1993.
12
The US have always seen the EU as a tool of their foreign policy, the civilian equivalent of NATO if you like. That's why Washington worked so hard to scuttle the European Defence Community of 1952 and to neuter the Élysée Treaty of 1962. And now those pesky litte British nationalists are spoiling EVERYTHING with their silly Brexit insurrection.
Sorry, Washington, but you can't have it both ways. The EU is an alliance of democracies (which is why Turkey, despite your best efforts, was not admitted), and you either have to let it bloom into a fully independent confederation or see it wilt and die. Sadly, the latter seems more likely than the former, but maybe a Brexit will be a healthy wakeup call for the continent - even though I'm not holding my breath.
Sorry, Washington, but you can't have it both ways. The EU is an alliance of democracies (which is why Turkey, despite your best efforts, was not admitted), and you either have to let it bloom into a fully independent confederation or see it wilt and die. Sadly, the latter seems more likely than the former, but maybe a Brexit will be a healthy wakeup call for the continent - even though I'm not holding my breath.
9
'Britain’s Dangerous Urge to Go It Alone'
It's all Paul Krugmans fault as he advocated for month and years for a 'Grexit'.
And 'Grexit' or 'Brexit' it's all the same - as the only difference is that the Greks would have been devalued by 50 percent and the Brits only by 20 or 30 percent of their pounds.
And I know that's a silly statement - but with an incredible deep and serious moral about 'the absurd mind financial mechanists' - please let it pass moderation?
It's all Paul Krugmans fault as he advocated for month and years for a 'Grexit'.
And 'Grexit' or 'Brexit' it's all the same - as the only difference is that the Greks would have been devalued by 50 percent and the Brits only by 20 or 30 percent of their pounds.
And I know that's a silly statement - but with an incredible deep and serious moral about 'the absurd mind financial mechanists' - please let it pass moderation?
As an American I really know next to nothing about the issues and consequences at stake here. I very often wonder how people from other countries can make comments on our political problems and challenges so I will not, however I will say that it is great that we live in countries where these things are voted on. All you English, get out and vote!!
4
NYT editorial nails the reactionary mentality behind Leave and rightwing conviction worldwide:
The euroskepticism that has led to the British referendum, and that forms a strong component of the right-wing nationalist parties on the rise in many European countries, is not about efficiency or history. It is about ill-defined frustration with the complexities of a changing world and a changing Europe, a loss of faith in mainstream politicians and experts, a nostalgia for a past when nations decided their own fates and kept foreigners out. To those who hold these views, the European Union is the epitome of all that has gone wrong, an alien bureaucracy deaf to the traditions and values of its members. Not surprisingly, Mr. Trump and the French politician Marine Le Pen both favor Brexit.
The euroskepticism that has led to the British referendum, and that forms a strong component of the right-wing nationalist parties on the rise in many European countries, is not about efficiency or history. It is about ill-defined frustration with the complexities of a changing world and a changing Europe, a loss of faith in mainstream politicians and experts, a nostalgia for a past when nations decided their own fates and kept foreigners out. To those who hold these views, the European Union is the epitome of all that has gone wrong, an alien bureaucracy deaf to the traditions and values of its members. Not surprisingly, Mr. Trump and the French politician Marine Le Pen both favor Brexit.
2
They just don't want to be governed by the mad woman that destroyed Germany all by herself. After the migrant disaster I don't blame them. These are proud people and want go it alone. Let them!!
8
@chris
Just for the record. Germany's Chancellor Merkel isn't "mad" -- the world is.
She saw a humanitarian need to do something to help the people of Syria, and opened the doors to them...the only problem is that EVERYBODY came along as well.
That said, it's a difficult problem that deserves more than the over-simplified terms you've reduced it into.
Just for the record. Germany's Chancellor Merkel isn't "mad" -- the world is.
She saw a humanitarian need to do something to help the people of Syria, and opened the doors to them...the only problem is that EVERYBODY came along as well.
That said, it's a difficult problem that deserves more than the over-simplified terms you've reduced it into.
3
Why should they belong to an organization that forces its members to adopt a certain (socialist) political ideology? It is also responsible for the influx of migrants who commit an inordinate proportion of crime and who abuse the social services systems of their member countries. The valuable individual cultures of these once sovereign nations are being totally destroyed.
7
I should like to see the delineation of the relation between the EU and NATO as part of the discussion. World peace may depend on the decentralization of power blocs and the rise of multiple centers of power. NATO, like its Russian counterpart, is a continued stimulus of and on behalf of the Cold War. Britain's exit might encourage others to leave, thus partially dismantling the national enthusiasm for participating in a joint-military alliance. Should that happen, where the threat of forces on Russia's borders is diminished, perhaps Russia would be similarly inclined to welcome a relaxation in tensions.
To see the EU as merely an economic formation is naive; it is a foundation stone for NATO, and hence Brexit is more than ultra-Rightist sentiment. Ideally, whatever attacks militarism and bi-polarization is for the good of humanity. I recognize that this is not part of the dialogue, but I believe it is more important than trade and other considerations. Even if done for the wrong reasons, I should like to see Britain leave.
Among the proponents of remaining in, we find those, e.g., Obama, who favor confrontation as a permanent way of life. The world needs less restrictiveness. China, too, is a central player in the world economy. Why not an international framework geared to the benefit of economies as such, stripped of military implications?
To see the EU as merely an economic formation is naive; it is a foundation stone for NATO, and hence Brexit is more than ultra-Rightist sentiment. Ideally, whatever attacks militarism and bi-polarization is for the good of humanity. I recognize that this is not part of the dialogue, but I believe it is more important than trade and other considerations. Even if done for the wrong reasons, I should like to see Britain leave.
Among the proponents of remaining in, we find those, e.g., Obama, who favor confrontation as a permanent way of life. The world needs less restrictiveness. China, too, is a central player in the world economy. Why not an international framework geared to the benefit of economies as such, stripped of military implications?
1
In my opinion the EU in principle is a good (necessary) thing. Europe's shrinking % of population compared to other regions made European countries too small to compete alone with giants like US, China or India.
However the way the EU functions is the issue. In Austria I know who am I voting for,the parties are aware that they will be easily sacked by the electorate. It's not the case of the EU parliament, tens of thousands of bureaucrats, let alone the EU commission.
Germany invites half of the third world to Europe (most of them without any ID) then screams about the lack of solidarity among EU countries. Thus the EU commission now wants to push down on members throat a "permanent redistribution quota" (not that the migrants would stay in Romania, for example, obviously they would move to Northern Europe). Therefore citizens feel powerless as Junker & Co decides who comes to your country and what benefits you're giving them.
Then the European Court of Justice is barring individual countries to deport known terrorists and hate preachers because their right to family life (family in the EU).
The EU parliamentarians meanwhile overpaid, are deciding about the shape of the carrots in the EU (no joke).
However the way the EU functions is the issue. In Austria I know who am I voting for,the parties are aware that they will be easily sacked by the electorate. It's not the case of the EU parliament, tens of thousands of bureaucrats, let alone the EU commission.
Germany invites half of the third world to Europe (most of them without any ID) then screams about the lack of solidarity among EU countries. Thus the EU commission now wants to push down on members throat a "permanent redistribution quota" (not that the migrants would stay in Romania, for example, obviously they would move to Northern Europe). Therefore citizens feel powerless as Junker & Co decides who comes to your country and what benefits you're giving them.
Then the European Court of Justice is barring individual countries to deport known terrorists and hate preachers because their right to family life (family in the EU).
The EU parliamentarians meanwhile overpaid, are deciding about the shape of the carrots in the EU (no joke).
9
It seems that all the commentators on here have one thing in common, a profound misunderstanding of why the Brexiters feel as they do and who they are. It's intellectual indolence to assume that all Brexiters are right wing loonies. I myself have voted Labour all my life, spent two years teaching in Sudan with Voluntary Service Overseas, and have been a union member all my life. Hardly the profile you are trying to portray as a typical Brexiter.
Six months ago the British Prime Minister said that the choice between remain and exit was finely balanced and only if he got his (pathetically inadequate) 'reforms' would he advise remaining and was willing to advise exit if he did not. Now that finely balanced decision has become, Armageddon, WW111, the collapse of the civilisation, and plagues of locusts and boils (alright I made that last one up). So the question for the PM is, was he lying then or is he lying now?
Our democracy has been systematically undermined by unelected and faceless European bureaucrats whose diktats we are forced to obey. These are not the ravings of a right wing loony, these are the realities under which people in the United Kingdom live and many of us, from all sides of the political spectrum, have had enough.
I am enormously disappointed by the nanny like tone of disapproval in this publication. I would have hoped that if any people could understand the devastating loss caused by the erosion of democratic freedoms, it would surely be Americans.
Six months ago the British Prime Minister said that the choice between remain and exit was finely balanced and only if he got his (pathetically inadequate) 'reforms' would he advise remaining and was willing to advise exit if he did not. Now that finely balanced decision has become, Armageddon, WW111, the collapse of the civilisation, and plagues of locusts and boils (alright I made that last one up). So the question for the PM is, was he lying then or is he lying now?
Our democracy has been systematically undermined by unelected and faceless European bureaucrats whose diktats we are forced to obey. These are not the ravings of a right wing loony, these are the realities under which people in the United Kingdom live and many of us, from all sides of the political spectrum, have had enough.
I am enormously disappointed by the nanny like tone of disapproval in this publication. I would have hoped that if any people could understand the devastating loss caused by the erosion of democratic freedoms, it would surely be Americans.
14
Michael.......I understand you and yes, I am an American!
Vote for Brexit!
Vote for Brexit!
7
I too am an American, but think that the British should make up their minds for themselves -- after all, they're the ones who will have to go on living there.
4
Pray do elaborate on how those diktats have made you and millions of others suffer and how that suffering so exceeds the suffering of your grandparents and great grandparents in fighting or living through two European wars...
1
How much is a country's soul worth on the open market or in the E.U. common market? You'd better know how much it's worth because the value of relative freedom can be very high.
If Britain stays in, the cost of that lost freedom will be counted every time Brussels forces a fee on the British they don't want to pay. The difference is that the British will not be given a choice of whether they want to pay the fee. They will have lost the freedom to say no.
The value of freedom is priceless. Vote for Brexit!
If Britain stays in, the cost of that lost freedom will be counted every time Brussels forces a fee on the British they don't want to pay. The difference is that the British will not be given a choice of whether they want to pay the fee. They will have lost the freedom to say no.
The value of freedom is priceless. Vote for Brexit!
8
Yes, it's easy to dismiss responses to globalization - for that's what we are talking about here - as something we have all got to learn to live with, yet I don't recall a referendum asking us whether or not we wanted to be governed by the Washington Consensus, or whether or not we were asked if wanted to exchange social justice for market justice.
The moves to reduce First World living standards to those of the Far East are the reality of what is taking place.
The moves to reduce First World living standards to those of the Far East are the reality of what is taking place.
4
Brits and others in the eu are encountering the states' rights dilemmas we've had here for about 240 years. So, welcome to the club. Where have I heard the refrain before, Let us govern ourselves. Perhaps from the governor of Michigan who knowingly endorsed the poisoning of the water for the minority city of Flint. Home rule, clearly, is not all bad. But neither is it all good ipso facto. I hope that the majority of the Brits decide to back away from the precipice. For their withdrawal from the EU will disrupt global markets and trigger widespread recession, if not downright economic depression. We in the US, still dragging ourselves up from the Great Recession need to be pushed down underwater again like a hole in the head.
Britain aim acrually newer was united Europe, economicaly, financialy and politicaly. Britain entered EU for they selfish interest and now realising that they can't manipulator EU furter on and use it for they selfish interest, they are ready to live it. EU will only gain by it, because one destructive member less will have.
Am I alone in wondering how much support for leaving the EU is due to the same feeling that has brought Trump success in the US?
A perception (fact or fiction) by voters that penniless immigrants are overwhelming the EU in the same way there is a perception (fact or fiction) that penniless immigrants are overwhelming the US. A further perception that governments are more interested in helping immigrants than their own people.
As climate change will soon drive hundreds of millions of people in massive migrations from one place to another, this is a situation that governments must somehow learn to address, because these human tides will get worse, not better.
A perception (fact or fiction) by voters that penniless immigrants are overwhelming the EU in the same way there is a perception (fact or fiction) that penniless immigrants are overwhelming the US. A further perception that governments are more interested in helping immigrants than their own people.
As climate change will soon drive hundreds of millions of people in massive migrations from one place to another, this is a situation that governments must somehow learn to address, because these human tides will get worse, not better.
1
The European Union is the entity faced with a "change or go extinct" dilemma, not the UK.
The EU bureaucracy has proven itself to be dysfunctional from a governance perspective on every political matter outside of economic collaboration. Its insistence to inflict cultural change on the native population of the various European states is the root cause of its dysfunction. It is also the root cause of everyday European people to scorn the bureaucratic elites of the EU and their supporters.
Established culture always triumphs over inflicted culture. When the inflicted culture contributes to diminishing the established way of life for the native population, no amount of political spin management will cause the native folk to embrace the newcomers.
When faced with change, imposed from the outside, that is insensitive at best and destructive at worst, people will make emotional decisions to resist the change. Those decisions are cathartic and may carry hangovers, but people will act on them.
The EU brings no culture of its own to any European nation. So the only thing they bring is rules to constrain local cultures. Worse, the EU bureaucrats and the two ruling states Germany and France really don't care what the smaller and poorer states may / not want. Or, what the smaller states will need to manage in terms of their own people's expectations. "Just do it" seems to be the EU mantra.
Well, "just do it" hasn't worked, it's not working and it will never work.
The EU bureaucracy has proven itself to be dysfunctional from a governance perspective on every political matter outside of economic collaboration. Its insistence to inflict cultural change on the native population of the various European states is the root cause of its dysfunction. It is also the root cause of everyday European people to scorn the bureaucratic elites of the EU and their supporters.
Established culture always triumphs over inflicted culture. When the inflicted culture contributes to diminishing the established way of life for the native population, no amount of political spin management will cause the native folk to embrace the newcomers.
When faced with change, imposed from the outside, that is insensitive at best and destructive at worst, people will make emotional decisions to resist the change. Those decisions are cathartic and may carry hangovers, but people will act on them.
The EU brings no culture of its own to any European nation. So the only thing they bring is rules to constrain local cultures. Worse, the EU bureaucrats and the two ruling states Germany and France really don't care what the smaller and poorer states may / not want. Or, what the smaller states will need to manage in terms of their own people's expectations. "Just do it" seems to be the EU mantra.
Well, "just do it" hasn't worked, it's not working and it will never work.
10
The Brexit issue is also evidence that we are living in global disorder of unjust, unsustainable and, therefore, unstable international monetary, financial, economic and commercial systems. It is part of the liminal phase in which traditional verities and institutions are unraveling and new ones have not yet emerged.
It is always more important to strengthen cooperation than engage in separation and this would be another reason for Britain to remain in the EU. The EMU is not perfect, but its monetary cooperation is part of a global effort to bring about more monetary unions which can lead to an international monetary union with its own global central bank. In Verhagen 2012 "The Tierra Solution: Resolving the climate crisis through monetary transformation" (www.timun.net) he conceptual, institutional, ethical and strategic dimensions of a carbon-based international monetary system are presented of such international monetary union with a balance of payments system that would not only account for financial, but also climate credits and debts.
It is always more important to strengthen cooperation than engage in separation and this would be another reason for Britain to remain in the EU. The EMU is not perfect, but its monetary cooperation is part of a global effort to bring about more monetary unions which can lead to an international monetary union with its own global central bank. In Verhagen 2012 "The Tierra Solution: Resolving the climate crisis through monetary transformation" (www.timun.net) he conceptual, institutional, ethical and strategic dimensions of a carbon-based international monetary system are presented of such international monetary union with a balance of payments system that would not only account for financial, but also climate credits and debts.
Of course, as Americans no one should understand the concept of Indepence better than we. After all, we were the ones who once forced ourselves away from the British to go it alone as well.
But as Americans, who are we to tell them what to do?
While there has been no love lost between Britain and the E.U. -- they are still part of a continent that has found more economic strength by working together, even while their political ideologies differed greatly.
And regardless of what any other country, or its leaders have to say, this is something that the British will have to decide on their own.
But as Americans, who are we to tell them what to do?
While there has been no love lost between Britain and the E.U. -- they are still part of a continent that has found more economic strength by working together, even while their political ideologies differed greatly.
And regardless of what any other country, or its leaders have to say, this is something that the British will have to decide on their own.
2
I agree that economically a 'Brexit' is most likely a blunder, but as with many things in life, it's not always about the money. In our sense of democracy and human rights we tend to emphasize freedom over the provision of free health care, education and lifting people from poverty. So, in Britain one can see the desire of people to regain their democratic rights. It is not turning back the clock, but it does seem to be a desire to stop the further influence of an undemocratic, unaccountable European Union. Whenever I read "there is no turning back the clock" I think that history is not pre-ordained but made, and thus we can go either way. The Brexit camp is often accused of being racist, but for example in the US nobody would even remotely think to delegate immigration to a supranational body like the UN or Nafta. Yet, Britons are supposed to be racist for a right the US takes for granted.
5
Even if the UK votes to leave, it would not be an immediate event but rather take 1-2 years to negotiate out with the EU. As such the chaos predicted is an exaggeration. I'm betting, like the Scottish independence vote, people will vote with their heads to stay in.
As a former resident of Britain, I can say with confidence that the Brexit is not about reason, but about *English* nationalism, plain and simple. If Britain wants to enjoy the advantages of the common market without EU membership, it will have to enact all EU regulations and pay hefty membership fees, just like Norway and Switzerland, which are held up as shining examples by the Brexit crowd. Possibly, membership fees will be even higher than they are today, because the EU will no longer give Britain the rebate it has received for decades. In the best case scenario, Brexit will simply mean sending more money to Brussels in exchange for losing all political influence. Oh well. But the English will be willing to pay this price just to feel one more like a sovereign superpower - if one is not looking too closely.
3
"There is no argument that the European Union is a flawed institution. Its dysfunction has been on display in its fitful handling of the Greek debt and refugee crisis, its bureaucracy is pathetically slow to recognize or correct its failings and it often acts like an out-of-touch and undemocratic elite."
Hmmm...sounds suspiciously like another federal bureaucracy that is currently suffering an insurgency from both the right and left as it selects new leadership this November. Perhaps the elite should wake up to the realization that working classes just aren't that interested in what they're being sold anymore.
Hmmm...sounds suspiciously like another federal bureaucracy that is currently suffering an insurgency from both the right and left as it selects new leadership this November. Perhaps the elite should wake up to the realization that working classes just aren't that interested in what they're being sold anymore.
3
Well said. Britons asking for perfection from an imperfect Union, are deluding themselves. Perhaps they 'forgot' that this long in peace and prosperity makes them unable (unwilling?) to remember history (bloody wars) and the current benefits they take for granted. Flawed? Of course; but the alternative would be not only painful but stupid. It reminds us of W. Bush and Dick Cheney, creating a war (out of thin air, lying to their own country, and for which they now enjoy a comfortable retirement), not knowing its complexity, duration, and cost. 'Brexit' is a nostalgic move to try to recover the 'good old times' (really?), but in reality its proponents are shooting themselves in the foot. Once done, the wounds may fester for a long time, and no crying will make'em better.
Yes Britain leaving Europe would be a difficult economic moment, but a useful one as to further integration, which the UK has constantly opposed since day 1; as well, most EU citizens would be relieved to see the British, with their unrelenting demands fo accommodations/exemptions etc go their own way. Problem is, nobody's asking the rest of Europe if they agree to the very significant concessions that Britain has extorted from the UE under the threat of leaving. There lies a true democratic deficit ...
6
"most EU citizens would be relieved to see the British, with their unrelenting demands fo accommodations/exemptions etc go their own way"
Sorry but I think that Britain constitutes an important check of balance between France and Germany and these days especially between the South and North.
Their departure would be a disaster especially for Northern Europe. However I can understand their decision. In the past I was an avid EU supporter (parents from 2 different EU countries, gf from a 3rd EU country) but seeing where the EU is heading to, turns me more and more into an euro skeptic.
Overpaid EU bureaucrats criticizing every aspect of national government which doesn't fit their narrow agenda. Its outrageous. Either reform the whole thing or leave it to fall apart.
Currently I can compare the EU with the Holy Roman Empire of the Germans. It wasn't accidental that the H.R.E. was brought up as an example in 1788 how the US should NOT function.
Sorry but I think that Britain constitutes an important check of balance between France and Germany and these days especially between the South and North.
Their departure would be a disaster especially for Northern Europe. However I can understand their decision. In the past I was an avid EU supporter (parents from 2 different EU countries, gf from a 3rd EU country) but seeing where the EU is heading to, turns me more and more into an euro skeptic.
Overpaid EU bureaucrats criticizing every aspect of national government which doesn't fit their narrow agenda. Its outrageous. Either reform the whole thing or leave it to fall apart.
Currently I can compare the EU with the Holy Roman Empire of the Germans. It wasn't accidental that the H.R.E. was brought up as an example in 1788 how the US should NOT function.
19
@ Johann
I also understand that Austrians are really mad at Merkel for opening Germany's borders, which left Austria with 90.000 refugees or 1% of the population. But that's politics in a confederation, and Merkel lost. She thought she could redistribute the million migrants who came to Germany and she couldn't. Of course, she has done enormous damage to the EU with her decision and indeed it is in fact the main issue the Leave camp is trying to exploit. But Germany is not the EU and to the EU's credit, it has - mostly successfully - opposed Merkel's idiotic policies. And no, the EU is not a bureaucratic moloch. As a matter of fact, it employs less bureaucrats than the city of Vienna. Also to be fair, in 1788, the Holy Roman Empire had been around for 826 years and was beyond its prime.
I also understand that Austrians are really mad at Merkel for opening Germany's borders, which left Austria with 90.000 refugees or 1% of the population. But that's politics in a confederation, and Merkel lost. She thought she could redistribute the million migrants who came to Germany and she couldn't. Of course, she has done enormous damage to the EU with her decision and indeed it is in fact the main issue the Leave camp is trying to exploit. But Germany is not the EU and to the EU's credit, it has - mostly successfully - opposed Merkel's idiotic policies. And no, the EU is not a bureaucratic moloch. As a matter of fact, it employs less bureaucrats than the city of Vienna. Also to be fair, in 1788, the Holy Roman Empire had been around for 826 years and was beyond its prime.
1
Your penultimate paragraph is apposite, but:
Ten percent Scotland, whether in or out, is not a problem. Remember, they are only in the UK at their own requests, both three-and-a-half centuries ago and quite recently.
Encouraging euroskeptics across the Continent is precisely what is needed in order to shatter the EU's complacency, bring its structural faults into sharp focus and force the bloc to correct itself or implode. One or other must occur because as it is, it's a rotten apple.
Ten percent Scotland, whether in or out, is not a problem. Remember, they are only in the UK at their own requests, both three-and-a-half centuries ago and quite recently.
Encouraging euroskeptics across the Continent is precisely what is needed in order to shatter the EU's complacency, bring its structural faults into sharp focus and force the bloc to correct itself or implode. One or other must occur because as it is, it's a rotten apple.
5
The primary purpose of the European Union is to peacefully bind and tame the most populous socioeconomically powerful scientific technologically advanced European nation Germany. With 7% of humanity the EU has 23% of nominal GDP. America has 5% of humans with 22% of nominal GDP. That is the ethnic sectarian historical price and legacy of two world wars.
Ironically, the British royal house is deeply rooted in German ethnicity. While Britain is America's ethnic sectarian closest most important ally. And there are more German Americans than there are any other kind of ethnic national origin Americans. Due to a below replacement birth rate, low ethnic diversity and low immigration Europe has a rapidly aging and shrinking population. America also has a below replacement white birth rate. But America has a significant black and brown native and immigrant population.
Ironically, the British royal house is deeply rooted in German ethnicity. While Britain is America's ethnic sectarian closest most important ally. And there are more German Americans than there are any other kind of ethnic national origin Americans. Due to a below replacement birth rate, low ethnic diversity and low immigration Europe has a rapidly aging and shrinking population. America also has a below replacement white birth rate. But America has a significant black and brown native and immigrant population.
1
Make Britain Great Again is Brexit's raison d'etre to which I would add it is the nonsensical devotion to the kingship with all its ridiculous pomp and parade. The less educated Brits and elder Brits cannot break loose from a perceived greatness that the empire enjoyed until not long ago. But those times are gone, as are military glories claimed in the name of the Crown. Gone are the textile mills, the steel plants, and even the naval yards are a joke. It is the Queen who is kowtowing to the Chinese now, for economic gains, a reversal of fortune from the days when peddling of opium to the Chinese was a way to dominate and bring home loot.
If the City works it is because the Masters of Finance have learned the game of acquiring loot better than others, due to the game of kingship-lordship that has infiltrated the world of finance, where the lords have a way to lobby and fix the politics of a country, to avoid taxation, to hoard monies in tax havens to the benefit of no one, least of all to the ignorants, who, like we see with Trump constituents, are reduced to a stance of rabid jingoism that can lead to vicious crimes. If there will be poetic justice in this Brexit, it is because the death of Jo Cox, who will reach the status of a heroine, and justly so. She was a humanist, the noblest way to show empathy for all human beings.
If the City works it is because the Masters of Finance have learned the game of acquiring loot better than others, due to the game of kingship-lordship that has infiltrated the world of finance, where the lords have a way to lobby and fix the politics of a country, to avoid taxation, to hoard monies in tax havens to the benefit of no one, least of all to the ignorants, who, like we see with Trump constituents, are reduced to a stance of rabid jingoism that can lead to vicious crimes. If there will be poetic justice in this Brexit, it is because the death of Jo Cox, who will reach the status of a heroine, and justly so. She was a humanist, the noblest way to show empathy for all human beings.
1
The problem is that the world needs to become more unified and work together to solve the global problems that confront us as humans not just as Americans, or British, or German, or Brazilians, or Africans, or Chinese, but we are not ready to give up enough of our national identities yet to allow that to happen. The loss of sovereignty and control over the future is just too daunting for many to accept. We see this at a national level with Trump and Sanders who basically want to take care of home first before taking care of the rest of the world. The British seem to be moving in the same direction.
When you see the great disparities in social structures, language, religious belief, income, etc., among the nations of the world, we are clearly a long way away from a practical world government. We continue to face states' rights issues here at home, and we are much more homogeneous than the EU and enormously more homogeneous than the world in general.
Coming together, as we have seen, is not without its problems, sacrifices, and downsides. If you are a young adult and cannot see any immediate benefit from a globalizing world, you naturally oppose it, because it hurts you not benefits you. This vantage point will shift over time, but, until it does, the longer term benefits of coming together become irrelevant if you are the one who has to live through the burdens and pains of the coming together process. It may be unfortunate, but the British will likely exit it seems.
When you see the great disparities in social structures, language, religious belief, income, etc., among the nations of the world, we are clearly a long way away from a practical world government. We continue to face states' rights issues here at home, and we are much more homogeneous than the EU and enormously more homogeneous than the world in general.
Coming together, as we have seen, is not without its problems, sacrifices, and downsides. If you are a young adult and cannot see any immediate benefit from a globalizing world, you naturally oppose it, because it hurts you not benefits you. This vantage point will shift over time, but, until it does, the longer term benefits of coming together become irrelevant if you are the one who has to live through the burdens and pains of the coming together process. It may be unfortunate, but the British will likely exit it seems.
One has to recognize that the European experience of a large island nation without any land borders to other European countries (if we disregard Northern Ireland for a moment) is very different than that of Germany for example with nine neighboring countries. This difference in experience changes the outlook the citizens have on the European Union. But having said that, there are too many British voices favoring leaving the EU out of xenophobic tendencies and inherit sense of superiority towards their European neighbors.
In a day and age, when countries are willing to go to war over their right to join the EU and people die on the streets (Ukraine) - if citizens are calling to help a struggling European nation with a debt crisis (Greece) and are willing to open their purses to do so; we see that many Europeans recognize a greater promise and future in this imperfect union of European states.
I believe Britain hasn't embraced this vision yet - and for now, it might be better to leave.
In a day and age, when countries are willing to go to war over their right to join the EU and people die on the streets (Ukraine) - if citizens are calling to help a struggling European nation with a debt crisis (Greece) and are willing to open their purses to do so; we see that many Europeans recognize a greater promise and future in this imperfect union of European states.
I believe Britain hasn't embraced this vision yet - and for now, it might be better to leave.
5
The world is drowning in anti-collectivism. Right wing politics are driving everyone apart. Britain wants to leave the EU. Scotland wants to leave the UK. Each sect in the Middle East wants its own autonomous nation. The Southern States here want to ignore federal authority.
The big question not being asked is can each of these new states survive on their own? Could South Carolina make it as an independent nation? Do the Scotts have the economic power to develop a self sustaining infrastructure?
Joining a larger group entails compromises but it also increases strength and survivability. Is the issue of Brexit failed strength or the need for better compromises. Right wing politics is always based on blaming someone else for problems. These people took your wealth from you and by getting rid of them, you will be better off. The right never seems to consider that there may be advantages to including these people and better incorporating them into the system.
The biggest problems the word now faces, global economic stagnation, climate heating, overpopulation, deforestation, can only be addressed on a global, collective basis. We see the effects of these growing problems and try to segregate and hunker down behind walls. That wont solve any of these problems. It will just turn the world into a gigantic gated community while the whole place falls apart.
The big question not being asked is can each of these new states survive on their own? Could South Carolina make it as an independent nation? Do the Scotts have the economic power to develop a self sustaining infrastructure?
Joining a larger group entails compromises but it also increases strength and survivability. Is the issue of Brexit failed strength or the need for better compromises. Right wing politics is always based on blaming someone else for problems. These people took your wealth from you and by getting rid of them, you will be better off. The right never seems to consider that there may be advantages to including these people and better incorporating them into the system.
The biggest problems the word now faces, global economic stagnation, climate heating, overpopulation, deforestation, can only be addressed on a global, collective basis. We see the effects of these growing problems and try to segregate and hunker down behind walls. That wont solve any of these problems. It will just turn the world into a gigantic gated community while the whole place falls apart.
19
Here we go again, interfering in the democratic decision of another sovereign country. The decision to join or not join is a job for the majority of people whose oar is in that boat -- not ours. The idea of a United States of Europe is a good one, in theory...but in practice, the use of absolute power of one entity over the other entities is the joker in the deck. The dominating power today is coming from Germany. As it is here in the USA, Fascism is alive and well, and growing. There are always those whose arrogance is such that they think it is their God-given duty to manage the affairs of others. The memory of WW2 is still too raw. Regardless of what the government says, people in United Kingdom, and even Ukraine, just suffered too much, and they are not prepared to allow themselves to be bound by rules that take away their jobs and freedom so others can succeed. I will just cite the fishing industry -- a traditional work for Britain for a thousand years. EU ruled that half the boats must be taken out of the water, ostensibly to save the fish, but putting half the small fishing businesses out of work. Then the traditional fishing waters of Britain were made available to Spanish boats......
2
No one wants their culture smothered by immigration.
5
We remain too Britain focused. Why does no one ask "Will Continental Europe be better off without Britain?" After all, for much of modern history, Britain has been the spoiler. It has constantly stirred up trouble to keep the mainland scrapping so that Britain could go conquer the world in peace. The major stories of post WW II unification (Benelux, Coal and Steel community, common market) do not include Britain. Would the continent really suffer if divisive Britain were to wonder off in some self-important fantasy?
10
Spot on - one of the articles I read while overseas said that Ireland would suffer greatly if brexit were to happen because they really can't take care of themselves. Good old fashioned british imperialism.
"There is no argument that the European Union is a flawed institution. Its dysfunction has been on display in its fitful handling of the Greek debt and refugee crises..."
Has the U.S. handling of the Puerto RIcan debt crisis been any better? It doesn't seem so. Has the U.S. handling of the refugee crisis not been much worse? Basically it has accepted next to zero refugees (but still postured as having some kind of moral superiority).
In terms of dysfunction the U.S. is second to none among developed countries. A Senate which refuses to even consider a Supreme Court nominee, and Bozo the Clown as one of the two major candidates for next President.
"There is no argument that the United States is a flawed institution. Its dysfunction has been on display ..." etc. etc.
Has the U.S. handling of the Puerto RIcan debt crisis been any better? It doesn't seem so. Has the U.S. handling of the refugee crisis not been much worse? Basically it has accepted next to zero refugees (but still postured as having some kind of moral superiority).
In terms of dysfunction the U.S. is second to none among developed countries. A Senate which refuses to even consider a Supreme Court nominee, and Bozo the Clown as one of the two major candidates for next President.
"There is no argument that the United States is a flawed institution. Its dysfunction has been on display ..." etc. etc.
54
I don't think anyone would disagree with you. Every nation is a flawed institution; the US probably more so due to its outsize power. However, that is completely irrelevant to the article, which concerns Britain and the EU.
2
It sounds like another country where the inhabitants are dissatisfied with their establishment politicians just like the situation in the U.S. This decision belongs to Britain and Britain alone. It alarms me that President Obama interferes and gives his opinion on a vote not concerning him. You would think he has enough to concentrate on with the U.S.
34
Janis, I disagree. Britain is one of our closest allies if not the closest. We also have very strong economic ties with Britain. Whatever Britain decides will have an effect on us as well as the EU. America and the EU are close militarily, economically.
It is certainly Obama's business to weigh in on this.
It is certainly Obama's business to weigh in on this.
4
Has there been any discussion about the implications of this let me be "alone" with respect to the security council seat that UK occupies?
Don't leave, Brits – the US needs its poodle in the EU to provide cover, raise a persuasive voice, and act as a bagman to Euro pols for future US invasions.
18
I know a lot of working class Labour voters intending to vote Brexit. For those who have seen a steady decline their wages and living standards, their public services dismantled, their Northern communities ignored - they see this as a chance to give the establishment a big middle finger. The problem is that any satisfaction they might get in the voting booth will be very short lived. When the economy tanks, when the government imposes even harsher austerity measures ('we have to compete with China'), when factories leave, when immigration levels remain the same, they are the ones - as always - who will suffer most. And the divisions within the Labour Party will grow even starker. The winners will be those like Johnson and Gove and those who hold the working class in utter contempt and will gloat about what they just handed them on a silver platter: a chance to make Britain into their libertarian fantasy with fewer constraints from Brussels.
5
Britain has been a proponent of free trade for a very long time and would have been happy if the EEC (later EC and EU) had remained as a trade area. The EU leaders have other ambitions for overarching political union that decides and controls every aspect of life. They haven't got there yet, but that's the ambition.
As one of 28 countries in the union and 8% of voting rights (with more countries to come and an even smaller share of voting rights in sight), Britain has a SMALL voice within the EU. What's more, it's outlook differs from the rest (it is perpetually accused by France as being a bad member of the club).
While there will be an economic cost, it makes more sense for Britain to retain its own voice.
BTW: I will listen to the NYT pontificating on this subject once it advocates a union of the Americas, a single market with competencies in law, social and political policies, etc in which all countries of North and South America (perhaps with the Caribbean thrown in) make laws and appoint judges based on their population size. The US can then enjoy having its laws made by a collection of other countries.
As one of 28 countries in the union and 8% of voting rights (with more countries to come and an even smaller share of voting rights in sight), Britain has a SMALL voice within the EU. What's more, it's outlook differs from the rest (it is perpetually accused by France as being a bad member of the club).
While there will be an economic cost, it makes more sense for Britain to retain its own voice.
BTW: I will listen to the NYT pontificating on this subject once it advocates a union of the Americas, a single market with competencies in law, social and political policies, etc in which all countries of North and South America (perhaps with the Caribbean thrown in) make laws and appoint judges based on their population size. The US can then enjoy having its laws made by a collection of other countries.
37
Completely 100% wrong about the voting rights. Unfortunately this level of ignorance has characterised the whole 'brexit' campaign.
The UK has a veto over all major decisions and has used already used it to block an increase in the EU's budget.
The UK can block 80% of all other EU legislation working together with three or more other countries, as long as they represent at least 35% of the EU population.
The UK has a veto over all major decisions and has used already used it to block an increase in the EU's budget.
The UK can block 80% of all other EU legislation working together with three or more other countries, as long as they represent at least 35% of the EU population.
Notwithstanding the positions of Boris Johnson, Marine Le Pen, Donald Trump and their ilk, don't we as a global society achieve more by breaking down walls and barriers instead of putting them up? See, Berlin 1991.
3
What has been "achieved" is the disappearance of any leverage at all for workers throughout western countries. Globalism has resulted in the race to the bottom and the destruction of millions of lives and communities in the west. You really can't deny that.
3
I have lost my voice after the Cox assassination; it is a tragedy of unspeakable proportions. I have lost my voice because in favoring the Brexit, I seem aligned with Le Pen, Trump, and other hate-mongering, anti-immigrant voices in the UK.
But most arguments predicting economic gloom and doom are based on flimsy projections; arguments about Scotland leaving are similarly speculative. They ignore the civil society and the mature democracy; the open culture, the R&D and innovation, the risk-taking of British entrepreneurs. Has no one seen evidence of how well Britain does when dealing with things alone?
To believe the "let's stay in" crowd, is to believe that the entire reason for staying, and the entire consequences of leaving are economic. They are not. Every time a pol or a politician bloviates about multiculturalism, an increasingly wide swath of Anglo Saxon Britain squirms in private. There would be no momentum toward the Brexit if this squirming was not a widespread phenomenon. A generation ago, Enoch Powell failed; the blokes hollering today (Boris) may succeed for this reason.
The Brits will be better of economically - hence I favor the Brexit. But I am not naive to the reality that the Brexit is also the refusal to learn and grow as a multicultural society, and the giving in to irrational fears about immigration. If an argument against the Brexit is to be made, it is surely not an economic one. Economics is merely a convenient one.
Kalidan
But most arguments predicting economic gloom and doom are based on flimsy projections; arguments about Scotland leaving are similarly speculative. They ignore the civil society and the mature democracy; the open culture, the R&D and innovation, the risk-taking of British entrepreneurs. Has no one seen evidence of how well Britain does when dealing with things alone?
To believe the "let's stay in" crowd, is to believe that the entire reason for staying, and the entire consequences of leaving are economic. They are not. Every time a pol or a politician bloviates about multiculturalism, an increasingly wide swath of Anglo Saxon Britain squirms in private. There would be no momentum toward the Brexit if this squirming was not a widespread phenomenon. A generation ago, Enoch Powell failed; the blokes hollering today (Boris) may succeed for this reason.
The Brits will be better of economically - hence I favor the Brexit. But I am not naive to the reality that the Brexit is also the refusal to learn and grow as a multicultural society, and the giving in to irrational fears about immigration. If an argument against the Brexit is to be made, it is surely not an economic one. Economics is merely a convenient one.
Kalidan
5
Explain to me the logic of moving/immigrating to a country well known to have its own culture and history, and then bashing the tax paying citizens of that country as being "racist" and "narrow minded" if they want to preserve and protect that culture. Suppose the tax paying citizens of that physically tiny country do not want to become a "multicultural society"? Somehow it is the right of non citizens to force them to change their lives, probably for the worse? If non Brits (or non Americans) have the right to force their values on Brits, why don't I have the right to force Africans and Asians to stop massacring endangered species? Why the double standard?
4
It's worth noting that the NYT coverage is a LOT more clear-eyed than that of the British press. Some of the analysis in this article and recent others has been very articulate and correct about issues Brexiters are thinking about.
Where the NYT and the UK press align is in the interpretation of those issues, and that's where they all get some of the critical Brexit issues wrong.
For example, I have friends who have emigrated from the far east and South America who will vote Brexit - because they see EU-centred UK immigration policy as steeply biased against themselves, their countryfolk, and people from places outside the EU. They want Britain to develop an immigration policy that's globally fair, that doesn't favour Poles over Pakistanis or Peruvians.
The NYT and the UK press miss that fact - that in a globalised economy, we need globalised solutions, and the EU is woefully inward-looking in this respect. In that sense, the charge of Little Englandism applies to Little Europe as well. But who's talking about that?
Similarly, press discussion of sovereignty largely misses the point about alienation. Britain has grown extremely unequal in terms of income, opportunities, and life expectancy. The people who feel left out have been systematically excluded from political discourse, maligned as narrow-minded, racist, socially inept, feckless, and so on. Condescending opinion from the likes of Polly Toynbee just make it worse. NIgel Farage is a modern Guy Fawkes.
Where the NYT and the UK press align is in the interpretation of those issues, and that's where they all get some of the critical Brexit issues wrong.
For example, I have friends who have emigrated from the far east and South America who will vote Brexit - because they see EU-centred UK immigration policy as steeply biased against themselves, their countryfolk, and people from places outside the EU. They want Britain to develop an immigration policy that's globally fair, that doesn't favour Poles over Pakistanis or Peruvians.
The NYT and the UK press miss that fact - that in a globalised economy, we need globalised solutions, and the EU is woefully inward-looking in this respect. In that sense, the charge of Little Englandism applies to Little Europe as well. But who's talking about that?
Similarly, press discussion of sovereignty largely misses the point about alienation. Britain has grown extremely unequal in terms of income, opportunities, and life expectancy. The people who feel left out have been systematically excluded from political discourse, maligned as narrow-minded, racist, socially inept, feckless, and so on. Condescending opinion from the likes of Polly Toynbee just make it worse. NIgel Farage is a modern Guy Fawkes.
7
I think your friends have miscalculated and the Brexit will have the exact opposite effect on immigration than the one they seek. In fact, the Brexit will likely curb or reduce immigration altogether.
1
I'm a retired carpenter and in my mind the EU is falling apart for the same reasons some buildings fall apart. It was poorly designed and built with sub standard materials by people who didn't know, or care, what they were doing, to make a quick buck for the investors who could grab the profits and run.
This is unethical, but works if your building Codos in Florida or strip malls in the Midwest but it doesn't work when your building your own home.
The EU is built on the premises that the banks are more important than the people and it's just not working. Sometimes a building is just so poorly constructed the only thing to do is tear it down and start again.
Tearing a building down is disruptive and costs the investors money but propping it up and waiting for it to fall down is much worse and hurts a lot more people - Not important rich people, but people all the same.
This is unethical, but works if your building Codos in Florida or strip malls in the Midwest but it doesn't work when your building your own home.
The EU is built on the premises that the banks are more important than the people and it's just not working. Sometimes a building is just so poorly constructed the only thing to do is tear it down and start again.
Tearing a building down is disruptive and costs the investors money but propping it up and waiting for it to fall down is much worse and hurts a lot more people - Not important rich people, but people all the same.
34
Let's not beat about the bush. The vote for Brexit is not a vote to leave the European Union per se but a vote to stop immigration and assert national identity.
The sad thing is there are ways of constructively engaging with both issues without making such a fundamental decision on Britain's position in the world.
What is most egregious about this process is the Leave Camp's wilful ignorance of both the long term costs for Britain and its standing in the world and the broader geopolitical implications that Britain will create and for which it will refuse to hold itself responsible.
The sad thing is there are ways of constructively engaging with both issues without making such a fundamental decision on Britain's position in the world.
What is most egregious about this process is the Leave Camp's wilful ignorance of both the long term costs for Britain and its standing in the world and the broader geopolitical implications that Britain will create and for which it will refuse to hold itself responsible.
5
I support the editorial opinion; but rather than simply repeating myself, for those who might be interested I already offered a comment to Paul Krugman’s column today. You can read it here:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/17/opinion/fear-loathing-and-brexit.html?...
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/17/opinion/fear-loathing-and-brexit.html?...
"The euroskepticism that has led to the British referendum, and that forms a strong component of the right-wing nationalist parties on the rise in many European countries, is not about efficiency or history. It is about ill-defined frustration with the complexities of a changing world and a changing Europe, a loss of faith in mainstream politicians and experts, a nostalgia for a past when nations decided their own fates and kept foreigners out."
Simplistic movements to roll back the clock, like the one we hear here nonstop, can't deliver on their promises--history isn't a constant, it's like the proverbial changing rolling river of life, whereby you never dip in it using the same set of variables.
I agree with the Board (and our President and Dr. Krugman) that Brexit would remove one of the major stabilizing economic and political forces of EU.
We should be concerned about next weeks vote: it might portend our own future here if a majority opt for turtle-like economic and political isolation.
Simplistic movements to roll back the clock, like the one we hear here nonstop, can't deliver on their promises--history isn't a constant, it's like the proverbial changing rolling river of life, whereby you never dip in it using the same set of variables.
I agree with the Board (and our President and Dr. Krugman) that Brexit would remove one of the major stabilizing economic and political forces of EU.
We should be concerned about next weeks vote: it might portend our own future here if a majority opt for turtle-like economic and political isolation.
20
No doubt posted by an ivory tower academic.
2
I expect the usual flood of pro-Brexit comments, also revealing that most Americans do not really understand how the EU works or what its competencies are.
In my view, it is remarkably democratic and transparent for an international organization, which is also its weakness. A lot of the check and balances built in with each new Treaty, coupled with a 28-country membership make it less agile and more slow to react.
But it is built on compromise making and an understanding that at this day and age the challanges are global: whether climate change, refugee crises, wars, global economic shocks. On a resource-poor and energy dependent continent, most countries cannot go at it alone - definitely not the small ones like Belgium, Luxembourg or the Netherlands, no matter how proseperousd they are. They would have no voice or weight against giants like the US or the big emerging economies of China, India, etc.
The EU has been somewhat successful driving progressive agendas such as fight against climate change, driving the renewables markets, but also creating prosperity by lifting barriers. It is easy to criticize and there are reasons to criticise, but for the EU to fall apart, it would be a huge loss for all the countries on the continent, as well as a great geopolitical gamble vis-a-vis Russia, Middle East and other turbulent regions. There is more that ties us European together than what divides us, and it is still my fervent hope, that the British will do the sensible thing.
In my view, it is remarkably democratic and transparent for an international organization, which is also its weakness. A lot of the check and balances built in with each new Treaty, coupled with a 28-country membership make it less agile and more slow to react.
But it is built on compromise making and an understanding that at this day and age the challanges are global: whether climate change, refugee crises, wars, global economic shocks. On a resource-poor and energy dependent continent, most countries cannot go at it alone - definitely not the small ones like Belgium, Luxembourg or the Netherlands, no matter how proseperousd they are. They would have no voice or weight against giants like the US or the big emerging economies of China, India, etc.
The EU has been somewhat successful driving progressive agendas such as fight against climate change, driving the renewables markets, but also creating prosperity by lifting barriers. It is easy to criticize and there are reasons to criticise, but for the EU to fall apart, it would be a huge loss for all the countries on the continent, as well as a great geopolitical gamble vis-a-vis Russia, Middle East and other turbulent regions. There is more that ties us European together than what divides us, and it is still my fervent hope, that the British will do the sensible thing.
40
If the countries that make up the European Union have no faith in it, then it has already failed. If a small country like Britain leaving the Union causes it to fail, then it has already failed. If the Union cannot function in a manner than follows the wishes of the people of the countries in the Union, then it is not a Union at all.
12
I can understand from watching our politicians one would think Americans are stupid people, but we are not. We do understand how the EU works. Except we see that it isn't working. Ask Greece how it works. Ask countries like Italy who are trying to deal with the migrant crisis, how well the EU works.
I don't know what's best for Britain. They will have to decide. I do know however that the comment about small countries like Belgium, Luxemburg, etc. having any influence whatsoever on what the EU decides in regards to important policy is just wishful thinking. France and Germany direct those policies..
I don't know what's best for Britain. They will have to decide. I do know however that the comment about small countries like Belgium, Luxemburg, etc. having any influence whatsoever on what the EU decides in regards to important policy is just wishful thinking. France and Germany direct those policies..
2
Most Americans have no clue how the EU works. All new EU laws are originated by the unelected EU Commission, not by the European parliament. You might think these laws are enlightened, but imposing laws and regulations that are not wanted is not really democracy and leads to fricton.
One of the benefits of the EU referendum debate is that ordinary people are considering the pros and cons of membership for the first time. Many believe that for Britain the costs are greater than the benefits.
One of the benefits of the EU referendum debate is that ordinary people are considering the pros and cons of membership for the first time. Many believe that for Britain the costs are greater than the benefits.
2
It would also create Europe wide problems for the settlement of future immigrants and refugees?
1
Is it possible that threatening to exit is the only tool left to millions of ordinary Britains, who may feel their country has been stolen from them? Do patriotism or national sovereignty matter at all to elites on editorial boards?
24
I think the Brits are just fed up with the whole idea of a supranational organization imposing its will on member states. This kind of approach causes member states to protect their individual rights rather than work for the common good of all members.
Add to this the very structure of governance in the EU where unelected political has beens or domestic political embarrassments are appointed to key Commissioner roles, where members of the European parliament drive up to the front door to sign in for their daily attendance allowance and then promptly drive off, the variable fiscal discipline applied in a discriminatory manner depending on your size, e.g. France gets away with fiscal profligacy while Greece is hammered, where the EU governance is deaf to any idea that it requires reform where EU bureaucrats get 12 weeks vacations, where the insane monthly move of the EU parliament from Brussels to Strasbourg is a costly time-wasting exercise to satisfy the whims of the French government, where the EU members cling to the principle of acquired rights etc. etc
Should we really be surprised by the idea of Brexit given the extrapolation of such activities into the future with no hope of reform?
Add to this the very structure of governance in the EU where unelected political has beens or domestic political embarrassments are appointed to key Commissioner roles, where members of the European parliament drive up to the front door to sign in for their daily attendance allowance and then promptly drive off, the variable fiscal discipline applied in a discriminatory manner depending on your size, e.g. France gets away with fiscal profligacy while Greece is hammered, where the EU governance is deaf to any idea that it requires reform where EU bureaucrats get 12 weeks vacations, where the insane monthly move of the EU parliament from Brussels to Strasbourg is a costly time-wasting exercise to satisfy the whims of the French government, where the EU members cling to the principle of acquired rights etc. etc
Should we really be surprised by the idea of Brexit given the extrapolation of such activities into the future with no hope of reform?
76
Riskstrategies: "I think the Brits are just fed up with the whole idea of a supranational organization imposing its will on member states." This is utterly hilarious. The English have lost an empire, and were down to NI and Scotland (poor Wales was coopted way sooner). Having spent centuries imposing Englishness on the world, they're fed up when they see the other side of that?
2
And for your pique you will gain nothing and lose much. The remaining rump Britain will become an increasing irrelevant bit player on the world stage dominated by the Boris Johnsons and other Trump imitators.
1
TR: Rump Britain dominated by BoJo et al? England is not Britain. Don't dare to say Scotland or NI will be dominated by such a sleaze.
The EU combines a common currency and shared monetary policy, open borders and free trade. Britain opted out of the currency arrangement long ago, which allowed it to avoid several euro crises, while today several EU members are unhappy with open borders (immigration) following the influx of Middle Eastern refugees.
Experience of the past decade suggests that EU advocates should instead have established a European free-trade zone, without open borders or the common currency. Europe is not comparable to the USA, so institutional arrangements establishing a "United States of Europe" are neither appropriate nor politically sustainable.
Laudatory goals will not make the EU a success, if the specific rules it implements are politically divisive. "The road to hell is paved with good intentions."
Experience of the past decade suggests that EU advocates should instead have established a European free-trade zone, without open borders or the common currency. Europe is not comparable to the USA, so institutional arrangements establishing a "United States of Europe" are neither appropriate nor politically sustainable.
Laudatory goals will not make the EU a success, if the specific rules it implements are politically divisive. "The road to hell is paved with good intentions."
72
globalisation has been an unmitigated disaster for everyone except th plutocrats who designed it specifically for their benefit
only religion has been a greater scam and has caused more misery than globalisation
both are slavery for th majority of humanity
only religion has been a greater scam and has caused more misery than globalisation
both are slavery for th majority of humanity
57
1420.405751786 MHz: "globalization has been an unmitigated disaster..." As opposed to what?
2
The stark juxtaposition of a life, against a background of a billion lives, brings this issue into crisp focus. It puts a face onto pain; the pain of losing the beautiful life, and spirit, of Jo Cox.
When we see what’s really at stake, we can throw away politics, propaganda, and pretense. Phrases such as ‘Tariff-free access’ and ‘International Monetary Fund’ fade away, and life becomes simple again.
Yesterday I had only a passing interest in the Brexit issue; my instincts leaned toward unity. My German born mother was a WAAF, (Woman’s Auxialary Air Force), and always expressed her love of British decency. In her tiny way, my mother helped British decency win against her own Motherland.
And now a decent British woman, who also wanted unity, is killed by a man who represents what Germany itself represented eighty years ago, when my mother was ten. My mind reels, and my heart mourns in the kaleidoscope of emotions which can never reconcile the simple, beautiful smile of Jo Cox, with the wild hell of greed, hate, and fear which took it from us.
When we see what’s really at stake, we can throw away politics, propaganda, and pretense. Phrases such as ‘Tariff-free access’ and ‘International Monetary Fund’ fade away, and life becomes simple again.
Yesterday I had only a passing interest in the Brexit issue; my instincts leaned toward unity. My German born mother was a WAAF, (Woman’s Auxialary Air Force), and always expressed her love of British decency. In her tiny way, my mother helped British decency win against her own Motherland.
And now a decent British woman, who also wanted unity, is killed by a man who represents what Germany itself represented eighty years ago, when my mother was ten. My mind reels, and my heart mourns in the kaleidoscope of emotions which can never reconcile the simple, beautiful smile of Jo Cox, with the wild hell of greed, hate, and fear which took it from us.
30
"Not surprisingly, Mr. Trump and the French politician Marine Le Pen both favor Brexit."
Precisely. Along with Ukip's Nigel Farage, Brexiteers largely comprise inward-looking extremists who have become pied pipers for racists, stoking prejudice, fear and scapegoating, the natural precursors to conflict and war, which the EU, while not perfect, has largely helped to prevent on the Continent for 70 years.
Those of us thinking residents in the Remain camp are shaking in our boots.
Precisely. Along with Ukip's Nigel Farage, Brexiteers largely comprise inward-looking extremists who have become pied pipers for racists, stoking prejudice, fear and scapegoating, the natural precursors to conflict and war, which the EU, while not perfect, has largely helped to prevent on the Continent for 70 years.
Those of us thinking residents in the Remain camp are shaking in our boots.
68
How is demonizing your fellow citizens, who may have legitimate grievances, not extreme?
20
Understandable; but people like Farage have appeared on the scene because the global elites assumed that it was OK introduce massive changes to everyone's lives without bothering to get democratic assent.
4
The editors' fearmongering is reminiscent of the elders in the movie, The Village. And as in the movie, the only truth to be revealed is that the EU is an artificial construct of a different era, maintained by a fear of unknown and unseen monsters.
56
John: The EU is an artificial construct... As opposed to the UK?
2
Britons generally don't react well to lecturing, as your other likeminded contributors will have noticed in the comments associated with their columns. Add the nasty Trumpian insults, and as the British say: "Bob's your uncle".
24
'However flawed the bloc, it has replaced blood feuds with a single market, shared values, free travel and labor mobility..' Remember the 'blood feuds?' WWs I and II? How many Americans died to put the lid on those?
'Make America great again' - how the slogan insults the country, insults Americans. The 'nostalgia for a past when nations decided their own fates and kept foreigners out' was a recipe for bloodshed in that that same past and is the same recipe now - on both sides of the Pond.
'Make America great again' - how the slogan insults the country, insults Americans. The 'nostalgia for a past when nations decided their own fates and kept foreigners out' was a recipe for bloodshed in that that same past and is the same recipe now - on both sides of the Pond.
20
The EU is an extraordinary achievement. It has managed to bankrupt and impoverish several of its own EURO members, raise youth unemployment in Latin European countries to unprecedented levels, denied democratic accountability to 500 million people (think the voting down of the Constitution and its almost immediate replacement with the near identical Lisbon Treaty) and so much more. The problem with this editorial is that it fails to genuinely understand the long term path Europe has taken. The dysfunctional nature of its politics and economics is a recipe for disaster for its weakest members and condemns even its strongest members to low growth. It has never been fully explained why a free trade area is not sufficient and why political union is the only answer to Europe's internecine wars.
107
"It has never been fully explained why a free trade area is not sufficient".
You cannot have a "free trade area" without common rules and open borders and the necessary compromise those impose onto national self determination (which is exactly what everybody hates about it).
"It has never been fully explained why political union is the only answer to Europe's internecine wars".
Because we have already tried, and found worse, every other option since the fall of the Roman Empire?
You cannot have a "free trade area" without common rules and open borders and the necessary compromise those impose onto national self determination (which is exactly what everybody hates about it).
"It has never been fully explained why political union is the only answer to Europe's internecine wars".
Because we have already tried, and found worse, every other option since the fall of the Roman Empire?
3
"denied democratic accountability to 500 million people (think the voting down of the Constitution and its almost immediate replacement with the near identical Lisbon Treaty)".
That, in itself, is probably a sufficient enough reason to get out. Many Liberals base their disparagement of Brexit on the anecdotal fact that Nationalists (among others) favor it, basically equating any questioning of European sovereignty over and above national interests as a sign of Nazi allegiance. That, in itself, should raise flags on the validity of arguments against Brexit, if no less puerile arguments can be found against it. But for many here, the mere threat of being labeled a Trump or Boris Johnson sympathizer is enough to avoid unbiased consideration of the possible merits of Brexit. A sheeple mentality in effect.
That, in itself, is probably a sufficient enough reason to get out. Many Liberals base their disparagement of Brexit on the anecdotal fact that Nationalists (among others) favor it, basically equating any questioning of European sovereignty over and above national interests as a sign of Nazi allegiance. That, in itself, should raise flags on the validity of arguments against Brexit, if no less puerile arguments can be found against it. But for many here, the mere threat of being labeled a Trump or Boris Johnson sympathizer is enough to avoid unbiased consideration of the possible merits of Brexit. A sheeple mentality in effect.
3
Yes, Britain may be able to achieve a free trading relationship with the EU, but at what cost? We would most likely be required to sign up as Norway has to most if not all of the regulation and monetary contributions, but without any say. That will most certainly leave us weaker.
10
In Nigel Farage, the leader of the U.K. Independence Party, the Brexit campaign also have their own mini-version of Donald Trump without the comb-over. The similarities are rife; Mr. Farage has expressed admiration for Putin, has a history of murky financial dealings, seeks to liberalize Britain's strict handgun ownership laws, wants to scrap paid maternity leave, is well known for his intemperate "hate speech" has demonized immigrants to such an extent that he has been called "racist" by church leaders, has excused homophobic, misogynist, and racist language by his party members as "a few too many drinks at the pub," and of course he supports Donald Trump for our next POTUS. If the UK votes to leave the EU and is left with leaders like Nigel Farage, I wish them "Good night, and good luck."
63
didnt some colonies of england a while back have a dangerous urge to go it alone
which became th united states of amerrca
which became th united states of amerrca
19
They were colonies of Great Britain actually, not just England.
i stand corrected
gb formed in 1707
thx for th heads up
gb formed in 1707
thx for th heads up
500 years ago Europe was in the grip of the Roman Catholic church, which presumed to make laws that each country's king ignored at his peril. However, England's King Henry VIII left the European union for personal reasons (to get a divorce), and many predicted disaster for the England. The sky didn't fall in. Instead, under Henry VIII's daughter Elisabeth I rule, England looked outside Europe and developed trading relationships with America, Africa, India and the Muslim world.
27
Indeed the sky did fall in. The wars between Catholics and Protestants massacred many on both sides, including many English. The split also created incredible damage in my own country, Ireland, which is only recently starting to be resolved - a resolution which could well be damaged by the uncertainty that will follow a UK exit from the EU.
Of course, if all you think matters is GDP size and trading blocs, and the suffering of individuals is irrelevant, then perhaps you're right.
Of course, if all you think matters is GDP size and trading blocs, and the suffering of individuals is irrelevant, then perhaps you're right.
15
You are right - 100's of thousands died in the following civil/religious wars, and Ireland suffered terribly. I was wrong to be glib about the sky. But millions had died in the 100 years war between France and England before Henry VIII. War was endemic in those times.
I believe that wars often happen when powerful groups of people lose human contact and empathy of common people. Democracy, where powerful groups are forced to acknowledge the feelings of common people, tends to prevent wars. Sadly not in all cases.
I believe that wars often happen when powerful groups of people lose human contact and empathy of common people. Democracy, where powerful groups are forced to acknowledge the feelings of common people, tends to prevent wars. Sadly not in all cases.
3
Fortunately, times today are quite different today than they were 500 years ago. Those "trading relationship"? Hmm. I recall that a certain amount of military force was used to forge those relationships. Not something we wish to replicate in the 21st century.
2
I am sure the majority of British supporters of the Brevity also were howling last year when Scotland was deciding whether or not to secede.
The Scots, true to their nature, decided that stability and pragmatism trumps fear-based emotional, nationalistic aspirations.
And as we know, the Scots and the English are different.....
If it ain't broke, don't fix it!
The Scots, true to their nature, decided that stability and pragmatism trumps fear-based emotional, nationalistic aspirations.
And as we know, the Scots and the English are different.....
If it ain't broke, don't fix it!
12
The problem is that a lot of Brits think it is broke !
3
Before what I am sure will be a torrent of pro-Brexit comments flood this page, let me get my two cents' in.
If the UK votes to leave the EU it will be making on the greatest blunders in its long history. It will never regain the status of its former imperial glory. Those days are gone. It will not stop immigration - it cannot, without stagnation.
A look at the voices and people who support Brexit is enough to demonstrate who is on the wrong side: the bigots of UKIP, the vile and opportunistic Boris Johnson, and people who shoot their political opponents (my condolences to the family of Jo Cox). The Brexit campaign has been a farrago of half-truths, lies, and thinly veiled prejudice. One buffoon likened the EU to Hitler's Europa. That's enough, right there, to reveal the stupidity driving the entire campaign.
And there's a huge irony waiting in the wings for all those screaming about sovereignty and "taking back" the country, a Britain outside the EU would still need to do business with the largest trading bloc in the world and, as such, would still need to conform to its regulations and stipulations. But as an outsider, Britain would have given up her seat the decision-making table.
So the choice for "sovereignty" obsessed Brexiters is really this: deal with EU regulations from within, where you have a chance of shaping them, or deal with them from the outside, where they are imposed on you regardless. Ask Norway
If the UK votes to leave the EU it will be making on the greatest blunders in its long history. It will never regain the status of its former imperial glory. Those days are gone. It will not stop immigration - it cannot, without stagnation.
A look at the voices and people who support Brexit is enough to demonstrate who is on the wrong side: the bigots of UKIP, the vile and opportunistic Boris Johnson, and people who shoot their political opponents (my condolences to the family of Jo Cox). The Brexit campaign has been a farrago of half-truths, lies, and thinly veiled prejudice. One buffoon likened the EU to Hitler's Europa. That's enough, right there, to reveal the stupidity driving the entire campaign.
And there's a huge irony waiting in the wings for all those screaming about sovereignty and "taking back" the country, a Britain outside the EU would still need to do business with the largest trading bloc in the world and, as such, would still need to conform to its regulations and stipulations. But as an outsider, Britain would have given up her seat the decision-making table.
So the choice for "sovereignty" obsessed Brexiters is really this: deal with EU regulations from within, where you have a chance of shaping them, or deal with them from the outside, where they are imposed on you regardless. Ask Norway
149
Norway has the highest quality of life in the world, according to many surveys on the subject.
9
It is true that both sides of the debate have included half truths. But what is not in doubt is that the EU is trying to create an European Super State without the democratic consent of its 500m+ citizens. French and Dutch citizens roundly voted down the European constitution only to have it in through the back door with the Lisbon Treaty. That may suit the elites and our trading partners just fine but it has lead to untold anger across its citizenry over time. The recent Pew survey shows widespread discontent across the continent. You seem to think that everyone who opposes this machine does so on xenophobic grounds alone. You are very, very much mistaken. Some of us believe passionately in the principal of 'no taxation without representation'. Can you explain in simple terms how I can vote out of power an EU commissioner that creates 60% of our laws these days? There is no way to do it as an ordinary citizen. That in a nutshell is the problem. You acknowledge the EU has problems. But you do not seem to understand the scale of those problems. They are like a virgin who has fallen pregnant.
5
The US is caught up in the K Street consensus, and this corrosive pool of lobbyists might is what drives American policy towards the rest of the world in key areas:
1. No country is entitled to sovereignty except by the leave of the American Imperium. Non conforming states will be brought to heel regardless of the costs. This is the dicta of the neocons.
2. War making and Finance are equally capable of being militarised at the direction of our Unitary Executive as an extension of what was once diplomacy. All elements in the Pax Americana must have their economies opened up to the intervention of the hegemon, through the banks, as administered by our Treasury Department. This is the dicta of the neoliberals. All of technocrats in the EU are neoliberals.
3.NATO must continue to exist, not for mutual defense, but in order to keep Russia, with its structural wealth, strategic geography, and competative technology separate from Europe. It is the old Imperial strategy to divide and rule, and the imperium can achieve this best by allowing for weak European States, which exist within a hamstrung economy that is dependent upon the United States.
Prof. Robert Mundell (Columbia U. U of Chicago) was the father of the Euro. The former Bank of England head Mervyn King said on 3Mar16, that the "depression" in Europe "has happened almost as a deliberate act of policy". Specifically, King said that the formation of the European Union has doomed Europe to economic malaise.
Shocking huh!
1. No country is entitled to sovereignty except by the leave of the American Imperium. Non conforming states will be brought to heel regardless of the costs. This is the dicta of the neocons.
2. War making and Finance are equally capable of being militarised at the direction of our Unitary Executive as an extension of what was once diplomacy. All elements in the Pax Americana must have their economies opened up to the intervention of the hegemon, through the banks, as administered by our Treasury Department. This is the dicta of the neoliberals. All of technocrats in the EU are neoliberals.
3.NATO must continue to exist, not for mutual defense, but in order to keep Russia, with its structural wealth, strategic geography, and competative technology separate from Europe. It is the old Imperial strategy to divide and rule, and the imperium can achieve this best by allowing for weak European States, which exist within a hamstrung economy that is dependent upon the United States.
Prof. Robert Mundell (Columbia U. U of Chicago) was the father of the Euro. The former Bank of England head Mervyn King said on 3Mar16, that the "depression" in Europe "has happened almost as a deliberate act of policy". Specifically, King said that the formation of the European Union has doomed Europe to economic malaise.
Shocking huh!
2
This editorial is just another example of what will not convince anybody as is Roger Cohen's op-ed piece today (yesterday). See the better analysis of Peter Eavis in the Upshot.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/17/upshot/why-the-brexit-warnings-dont-se...
More convincing than this editorial is Paul Krugman today
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/17/opinion/fear-loathing-and-brexit.html?...
Voters vote not with their heads, but with their guts and hearts. Later somebody has to clean up the mess.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/17/upshot/why-the-brexit-warnings-dont-se...
More convincing than this editorial is Paul Krugman today
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/17/opinion/fear-loathing-and-brexit.html?...
Voters vote not with their heads, but with their guts and hearts. Later somebody has to clean up the mess.
6
The analysis in this editorial is correct.
And I put myself in the category described at the end of the editorial as one of the voters who understand what is at stake.
Unfortunately, I fear that there are not enough of us to make a difference and await next week's result with anxiety.
In the event of a victory for 'Leave', it will quickly become evident what a disastrous move that was.
And I put myself in the category described at the end of the editorial as one of the voters who understand what is at stake.
Unfortunately, I fear that there are not enough of us to make a difference and await next week's result with anxiety.
In the event of a victory for 'Leave', it will quickly become evident what a disastrous move that was.
12
Whatever the formal referendum verdict, having killed Jo Cox, the ultranationalist Brexit champions have already lost the argument, establishing, in a way, the legitimacy and strength of the idea of larger unity and cooperation, that Jo Cox was prepared to champion and sacrifice her life for.
24
It is a stretch too far to say she was prepared to sacrifice her life for this cause. She has lost her life in the course of being an MP and has been tragically murdered. She my have been unaware of how much danger she was in and may not have taken the risk if she had known the full scale of the risk. Saying the actions of one individual undermine the aspirations of nearly 50% of the country is fatuous. Immigration is but one issue in this debate.
23
It really hasn't taken long for people in possession of very limited information to turn tragic events into political statements.
If Prof. Sharma can be bothered to read The Times (London) today, he will see that the presumed killer was a man with life-long mental problems. No connection to any conspiracy or group has so far emerged.
If Prof. Sharma can be bothered to read The Times (London) today, he will see that the presumed killer was a man with life-long mental problems. No connection to any conspiracy or group has so far emerged.
12
why do you let the actions of a confirmed mentally ill person affect your opinion on this complex issue?
3
That could mean English people don't read the New York Times or that presenting only one side of an issue means the Times is only preaching to the choir.