If you voted to leave the EU, Don't bother wearing the poppy...
Scroll to see replies
Original post by Trinculo
People still peddling this line about the EU being a force for preventing war?
That was part of the early remit of the EEC, which bears no resemblance whatsoever to the EU. The real hallmarks of the European project have been increasing supranational political power and spending an awful lot of money on farming subsidies. That's a far cry from preventing war by fiddling with the steel and coal industries - and didn't even include us.
The real start of the EU was Maastricht - and what happened straight after that? Genocide in the Balkans, which the EU failed utterly to do anything about on its own doorstep.
That was part of the early remit of the EEC, which bears no resemblance whatsoever to the EU. The real hallmarks of the European project have been increasing supranational political power and spending an awful lot of money on farming subsidies. That's a far cry from preventing war by fiddling with the steel and coal industries - and didn't even include us.
The real start of the EU was Maastricht - and what happened straight after that? Genocide in the Balkans, which the EU failed utterly to do anything about on its own doorstep.
Not aware those were EU member countries then.
Original post by nutz99
It comes to something when a national newspaper is that desperate to get headlines that they put up an article like this which is full of inaccuracies and just rambles. Does the idiot that wrote it have any literary merits? He obviously has no literary morals. Pound of flesh for the trashy article sir?
As much as I think the Independent is just junk, it's the way it is for newspapers. They're all desperate to not become extinct, and the only way to prevent that is to become more and more polarising and attention seeking. Pretty much every newspaper has done that.
Original post by Trinculo
As much as I think the Independent is just junk, it's the way it is for newspapers. They're all desperate to not become extinct, and the only way to prevent that is to become more and more polarising and attention seeking. Pretty much every newspaper has done that.
its a simple argument - but one that does, at a simple level make a lot of sense.
EU = partly made to prevent war between European countries
Poppies = remembering those who died in wars
Anti-EU + Poppies = contradiction.
The problem is to anyone who actually wants to delve in and examine the logic, it does not hold up well:
The main problem with it lies with what is actually the root cause of the lack of war between developed nations in the modern world. Is it the EU? No. Its globalization.
The globalization of wealth and trade (among others) had brought and end to traditional war between developed nations as it has created a situation where war is simply no longer beneficial. We now have nations that are interdependent on each other and if one were to fall the other would too.
Did the EU help this? Yes. No question here - the EU was one of the first and most successful experiments in globalization, and it did create an interdependent Europe that would avoid war.
However where this argument falls down is that this is not the 1980s any more. Now in 2017 the EU is actually one of the forces against the progress of globalization. It has declared that interconnections stop at Europe, and shall go no further. Hence why you see a raft of protectionism, isolationism, and pro-European-only policies.
Its the reason why a (admittedly small) group of pro-globalization individuals, including many tory MPs voted to leave.. its because they see that now the world has moved past the EU and true globalization means trade, immigration, networks and links with the whole world, not just Europe.
Europe is not the center of the world as it was when the last world wars happened, and it could be very easily argued that the EUs lack of will towards true world-wide globalization is actually a hindrance to the progress towards world-wide peace.
-- anyway, I could go on, but the point is that intial aims do not nessasarily equate to current day outcomes, and these days the abilities and scope of the EU to prevent war has been vastly out-grown by international globalisation and interconectivity.. some of which the EU actually stands against.
EU = partly made to prevent war between European countries
Poppies = remembering those who died in wars
Anti-EU + Poppies = contradiction.
The problem is to anyone who actually wants to delve in and examine the logic, it does not hold up well:
The main problem with it lies with what is actually the root cause of the lack of war between developed nations in the modern world. Is it the EU? No. Its globalization.
The globalization of wealth and trade (among others) had brought and end to traditional war between developed nations as it has created a situation where war is simply no longer beneficial. We now have nations that are interdependent on each other and if one were to fall the other would too.
Did the EU help this? Yes. No question here - the EU was one of the first and most successful experiments in globalization, and it did create an interdependent Europe that would avoid war.
However where this argument falls down is that this is not the 1980s any more. Now in 2017 the EU is actually one of the forces against the progress of globalization. It has declared that interconnections stop at Europe, and shall go no further. Hence why you see a raft of protectionism, isolationism, and pro-European-only policies.
Its the reason why a (admittedly small) group of pro-globalization individuals, including many tory MPs voted to leave.. its because they see that now the world has moved past the EU and true globalization means trade, immigration, networks and links with the whole world, not just Europe.
Europe is not the center of the world as it was when the last world wars happened, and it could be very easily argued that the EUs lack of will towards true world-wide globalization is actually a hindrance to the progress towards world-wide peace.
-- anyway, I could go on, but the point is that intial aims do not nessasarily equate to current day outcomes, and these days the abilities and scope of the EU to prevent war has been vastly out-grown by international globalisation and interconectivity.. some of which the EU actually stands against.
(edited 6 years ago)
Original post by Chief Wiggum
I think The Independent is trash.
Yep. The Independent is the real gutter press.
The article in OP is just a terrible piece of content, regardless of its ideology. His prose is bad, his points are bad, and he appears to have no real grasp of how to link points to each other or to the article's title. He just meanders between apparently unconnected points until his article... stops. I was going to deconstruct how bad it is but it's really a larger task than I want to tackle.
I'd just draw attention to the fact that, in an article that sets itself up to take down Brexiteers, his penultimate paragraph is:
Who is really destroying this country? People who don’t wear poppies or people who don’t pay their taxes so we can fund public services?
And he ends with:
If people really want to understand the First World War, they may be well on their way to creating a world in which they'll get to relive it.
Wh-what?
What an absolute disaster it is that this outlet gets so much attention on social media.
I read that article and I swear I got at least 3 malignant tumours afterwards. It's the most poorly argued mess I've ever seen.
Original post by Retired_Messiah
I read that article and I swear I got at least 3 malignant tumours afterwards. It's the most poorly argued mess I've ever seen.
inneh OMFG!!!
Whilst I think the vote to leave was an act of economic self-harm, it has nothing to do with wearing a poppy (or not), and remembering those who have died in war. I would expect many if not most families in the UK had a relative who died in one of the two world wars, either whilst serving in the military or as a civilian whose house was bombed.
Well, I don't want to say this, but I'm going to anyway, it's the reaction suitable for such a stupid article. People fought and died in WW2 to stop Germany taking over Europe, and look which which country is in charge of the EU now?
Original post by Trinculo
People still peddling this line about the EU being a force for preventing war?
That was part of the early remit of the EEC, which bears no resemblance whatsoever to the EU. The real hallmarks of the European project have been increasing supranational political power and spending an awful lot of money on farming subsidies. That's a far cry from preventing war by fiddling with the steel and coal industries - and didn't even include us.
The real start of the EU was Maastricht - and what happened straight after that? Genocide in the Balkans, which the EU failed utterly to do anything about on its own doorstep.
That was part of the early remit of the EEC, which bears no resemblance whatsoever to the EU. The real hallmarks of the European project have been increasing supranational political power and spending an awful lot of money on farming subsidies. That's a far cry from preventing war by fiddling with the steel and coal industries - and didn't even include us.
The real start of the EU was Maastricht - and what happened straight after that? Genocide in the Balkans, which the EU failed utterly to do anything about on its own doorstep.
I through it was the UN peace keeper who did nothing to stop the genocide in the Balkans after the full of the USSR.
It would be fair to say that it was actually the older demographic of voters that chose to vote brexit - the same generations that have actually fought in our historical conflicts. To suggest such a statement is just typical left wing sensationalism that prevents them ever gaining traction.
Original post by looloo2134
I through it was the UN peace keeper who did nothing to stop the genocide in the Balkans after the full of the USSR.
At least the UN were there, and depending on the nation, some did their best within their remits. The EU, which some people are so fond of saying today is some great force for peace in Europe, came into being the same year as the War in the Former Yugoslavia started - and did pretty much nothing as war happened in Europe.
If the very first major event following the formation of the EU is a genocidal civil war with mass displacements, murders and ethnic cleansing - how exactly are we to believe that the EU is in any way an organisation capable of keeping peace? The great proponents of the EU - people like Mitterand did pretty much nothing and the kind of talk we are used to hearing today about "not bombing". Well, the War went on for years with thousands of deaths, ethnic cleansing and rapes - and what was it that sorted it out in the end? NATO air strikes.
How anyone can believe that the EU has contributed to peace in Europe in any meaningful way is beyond me.
Original post by YaliaV
I love that they are trying to dictate how people behave, think and feel, and then talk about the tyranny that we fought during the war - this level of control and manipulation is probably why a lot of people chose to leave. The EU is a very flawed and self-serving body and Europe is about more than that.
Thats a cute argument, the level of hypocrisy is particularly galling though.
Original post by yudothis
Not aware those were EU member countries then.
What difference does it make? If the EU is supposed to be this grand project of peace and security (which it isn't - it's a naked political power grab) what good is it if it's utterly impotent in a genocide on its own doorstep within weeks of its foundation?
The answer is- the EU was powerless to do anything because it has never been anything to do with peace in Europe in any real sense. It's about making the club richer and more powerful at any cost.
Original post by Trinculo
What difference does it make? If the EU is supposed to be this grand project of peace and security (which it isn't - it's a naked political power grab) what good is it if it's utterly impotent in a genocide on its own doorstep within weeks of its foundation?
The answer is- the EU was powerless to do anything because it has never been anything to do with peace in Europe in any real sense. It's about making the club richer and more powerful at any cost.
The answer is- the EU was powerless to do anything because it has never been anything to do with peace in Europe in any real sense. It's about making the club richer and more powerful at any cost.
Whose powergrab? Your conspiracy theories are laughable.
And why, should they play world police like America? No thanks.
Original post by yudothis
Whose powergrab? Your conspiracy theories are laughable.
And why, should they play world police like America? No thanks.
And why, should they play world police like America? No thanks.
How is it a conspiracy theory that the EU project is a powergrab? An organisation that used to give out farming subsidies to a few countries and tell people where they could fish - now tells people who is rich and who is poor, controls their central banks, has common currency and tells nations who can come and go and has supremacy over all courts within member states? That's not a power grab?
As for world policing - what planet are you on? This discussion is about whether or not the EU is an organisation rooted in keeping peace in Europe. Presumably your answer to peace in the Balkans would have been to wait until everyone was dead and then declare that the killing had come to an end.
I agree to an extent…. No wait I don’t. Britain has always pursued its own affairs, we’ve rarely been a reason for European conflicts, you’d have to dig back years, in modern history we only got involved because we were either dragged in or knew standing by our allies was the right thing to do.
Britain should be proud of its involvement in world 1 and 2 and how it helped shaped the outcome of victory, but most of all we should be credited for sticking by our allies in the aftermath and going on to play a big part in forming the EU. It was inevitable that Britain would once again choose to control its own affairs as it always has, especially given that the foundation of the EU was arguably heavily built without Britain in mind but certainly going forward the agenda is clearly different to what Britain wants - this started becoming clear when we declined to join the single currency and to have open borders with our neighbors.
I wouldn’t say people died in world war 1 & 2 to become apart of a European community, we honoured their lives by creating and standing by a community to prevent such tragedies again. But we can both support the EU and be clear we want something different while supporting their agenda just not for us.
Had we voted to abandon, unfriend and protest the EU’s existence then yes I’d agree, but as far as I’m aware that wasn’t on the ballot.
Britain should be proud of its involvement in world 1 and 2 and how it helped shaped the outcome of victory, but most of all we should be credited for sticking by our allies in the aftermath and going on to play a big part in forming the EU. It was inevitable that Britain would once again choose to control its own affairs as it always has, especially given that the foundation of the EU was arguably heavily built without Britain in mind but certainly going forward the agenda is clearly different to what Britain wants - this started becoming clear when we declined to join the single currency and to have open borders with our neighbors.
I wouldn’t say people died in world war 1 & 2 to become apart of a European community, we honoured their lives by creating and standing by a community to prevent such tragedies again. But we can both support the EU and be clear we want something different while supporting their agenda just not for us.
Had we voted to abandon, unfriend and protest the EU’s existence then yes I’d agree, but as far as I’m aware that wasn’t on the ballot.
(edited 6 years ago)
Original post by Trinculo
How is it a conspiracy theory that the EU project is a powergrab? An organisation that used to give out farming subsidies to a few countries and tell people where they could fish - now tells people who is rich and who is poor, controls their central banks, has common currency and tells nations who can come and go and has supremacy over all courts within member states? That's not a power grab?
As for world policing - what planet are you on? This discussion is about whether or not the EU is an organisation rooted in keeping peace in Europe. Presumably your answer to peace in the Balkans would have been to wait until everyone was dead and then declare that the killing had come to an end.
As for world policing - what planet are you on? This discussion is about whether or not the EU is an organisation rooted in keeping peace in Europe. Presumably your answer to peace in the Balkans would have been to wait until everyone was dead and then declare that the killing had come to an end.
And it has. Europe's history has been littered with peace and since the EU its member states have been at peace. Presumably you are talking out of your arse. What complete nonsense comes out of your head?
Original post by yudothis
And it has. Europe's history has been littered with peace and since the EU its member states have been at peace. Presumably you are talking out of your arse. What complete nonsense comes out of your head?
The above makes no sense. It's just drivel.
Simple question - why would you think that the EU, rather than NATO is the reason for peace in Europe?
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Who regrets the outcome of Brexit??
- Is there a reason why the government has failed to control its borders?
- Finally, a study to show what we all knew anyway.
- Rethinking the nation state - what a Labour Government could do
- Even Europe’s far-right firebrands seem to sense Brexit is a disaster- The Guardian
- I feel terrible about ending a friendship
- Politics edexcel alevel 2023 predictions
- Can someone mark this english essay about poppies and remains.
- Is the UK's future in peril?
- Compare how the theme of remorse is presented in both 'War Photographer' and 'Poppies
- Edexcel A-Level Politics Paper 1 Essay Feedback
- universita cattolica del sacro cuore med entrance exam
- Can someone please give me feedback on my A-Level Politics essay?
- Covid 19 seasonal vaccine
- AQA English Literature 2023
- Edexcel A Level Politics Paper 2 (9PL0 02) 7th June 2023 [Exam Chat]
- Can I stop wearing my retainers full time yet?
- Any tips for wearing glasses?
- Can immigration actually been controlled?
- GCSE AQA power and conflict poem to come up??
Latest
Trending
Last reply 3 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 3 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 3 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 3 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 3 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 3 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
