News and information from Europe πͺπΊ
(Current banner: La Mancha, Spain. Feel free to post submissions for banner images.)
(This list may get expanded as necessary.)
Unless they're the only sources, please also avoid The Sun, Daily Mail, any "thinktank" type organization, and non-Lemmy social media (incl. Substack). Don't link to Twitter directly, instead use xcancel.com. For Reddit, use old:reddit:com
(Lists may get expanded as necessary.)
We will use some leeway to decide whether to remove a comment.
If need be, there are also bans: 3 days for lighter offenses, 7 or 14 days for bigger offenses, and permanent bans for people who don't show any willingness to participate productively. If we think the ban reason is obvious, we may not specifically write to you.
If you want to protest a removal or ban, feel free to write privately to the admin that applied the rule (check modlog first to find who was it.)
I really think that it's time to stop bashing the Brits. Esp. those younger brits. There are many Pro-Europeans who got totally fucked by the older generation. Many of those older Pro-Brexit voters do not have to deal with border controls and bad job prospects, because they are dead. No one who is currently under 28 was even allowed to vote.
So stop the senseless bashing and let's try to work together to bring the UK back.
I am happy to have them back, but they should get zero special treatment this time. Full benefits, but also full financial responsibility and ideally Euro integration.
Trump and Brexit was 10 years ago.
I feel old.
They need to take the euro and move to pr-st voting.
They had a great deal and fucked it, letting them inwith Farage athe door is disrespectful to us in europe.
Sadly, it'll take years for the UK to rejon the EU, and only if there's a government that actually wants it too.
There are unbelievable levels of bureaucracy in the entire process. Tons of topics to negotiate, requirements to meet and verify.
There's at least one country that will become a new EU member before the UK rejoins. Possibly 2 or 3, depending on how the others do.
It's just sad how much time and resources were wasted because of this idiotic move. So many Brits could be living considerably better lives, but instead they have to deal with this shit for like 20-30 years in total. But hey, the politicians got their votes, ruled the country for a while, and they're set for life.
Decades*
That's how long it takes.
Not only would UK not get any special deal, but they would have to align in terms of anti-corruption, monetary policy, infrastructure, health, food, commodity, energy sector planning.
Very true. It'd have to completely revise most of its policies. As an existing member, it could have negotiated special terms or just stalled, but as a candidate, it has to follow requirements to the letter.
Kind of like an existing employee at a company can slack off or make silly mistakes, but a candidate on an interview cannot, because they just won't get accepted.
@Eximius @DupaCycki
Which is why I presume this process is already ongoing but not publicly, allowing dissatisfaction with Brexit to grow some more before Rejoin becomes a published govt policy.
But yeah, it'll take decades anyway.
The UK should never rejoin until it abolishes its first past the post system.
I'm 46, I'm not young!
Well, Britain has had the same foreign policy for the past 500 years. Create a disunited Europe.
Not completely true, they were immune to a lot of continental issues so they could just wait until they were ready and Europe (mostly France) wasn't. They could have a non interference policy anytime something went wrong. (see 1930s)
Not gonna happen anytime soon.
And there is no majority for it in UK when the reality of rejoining is explained.
There is a majority in general that is for reentering, but when the above points are stated, support in the general population drops to about 13%!!
It's probably higher among younger people, but without mentioning the above points, no poll on reentering is worth anything, because they are polling a pipedream.
Point 4 has something in the works for 65% of countries representing 75% of the population or something like that. Unanimity is difficult with growing pools.
The other three are chefs kiss though.
The problem is that we need a mechanism to stop a single country to hold back all of EU for years.
I think most agree on that. Problem is that it probably requires to take a way a bit of sovereignty to achieve that.
So it has to be done very carefully, to protect the rights of individual countries.
As it is it has worked extremely well, except for the situation with Hungary that were traitors within EU that supported Russia over EU.
I'm a British voter and I see no deal-breakers.
Good, IMO they shouldn't be. ;)
But to be fair I forgot what for some is the biggest deal breaker, which is the Schengen agreement that allows free travel for EU citizens within EU. Which of course again IMO is another benefit, not a drawback. But propaganda uses it to stir up xenophobia.
As an EU citizen I too don't see any problems in the above points. Getting a better democracy would seem to me to be a HUGE bonus. But sometimes Brits are a bit stubborn, and they want special treatment because they believe in British exceptionalism.
UK always considered itself separate from continental Europe, and somewhat superior to the rest of Europe. Which for decades was true, because UK were first to industrialize, and was immensely wealthy from having colonies and the world reserve currency.
But when that broke down after WW2, UK declined quickly and became a "normal" country. But the mentality never really followed the reality.
At least that's how I understand it.
But maybe the steep drop in support when the points are presented isn't so much because they are against them, as maybe they don't quite understand them, or think UK can get a better deal.
What for instance does it mean to switch from GBP to EUR? That's probably not so clear for everybody.
I'm not a finance wonk, but I don't think the UK does anything with pounds that can't be done with euros. Except maybe tax evasion? lol
Why would the UK have to give up the pound for Euro? Isn't the political institution still different from the Euro collective (or however it's called in EN)?
The EU requires its members to abandon FPtP elections? Is that for all electable branches of government? Thatβs awesome.
IDK if there are situations where it's not as bad as in UK. If the position has limited power, it may not be an issue. But in UK it's not just the government, it's the entire parliament, meaning it is crippling the opposition that is the main check on the government, and creating governments that have a vast majority, so even if some of their own don't follow the party line, they can press things through with majority anyway.
I have only heard it mentioned specifically regarding UK parliament.
They really didn't grasp at all the sweetheart deal they had with the EU... other countries would have killed for that.
It reminds me so much of the Americans complaining about their position in NATO and the "world policeman" that they fought tooth and nail to get because of the huge amounts of soft power it grants in negotiations and generally shaping world policy.
The irony of a Republican working to undo that... Kissinger's gotta be able to power a small country with how fast he's spinning. Ultimately, good for the world in the end, but another pretty hilarious example of a nation misinterpreting a boon as an albatross around the neck and shooting themselves in the foot by getting rid of it lol. Rhymes so much with Brexit.
Yes, the privileged tend to think they are somehow entitled to their privileges.
I guess both UK and USA have been fucking around too much, and are in the find out phase now.
Canada will join EU before UK does.
As things are going it is not impossible. But Canada still rely on USA as their most significant trading partner, and EU membership would dramatically complicate that relationship.
EU membership would dramatically complicate that relationship.
Threatening to annex Canada and economically attacking dramatically complicated that relationship.
Absolutely, but USA remains the biggest market for Canada.
Technically speaking, Point 1 isn't guaranteed to be demanded by the EU. Most of the EU agrees that the UK rejoining would be a huge benefit to the EU. Whether that means the EU would agree to waive the monetary union requirement is not a settled question.
Furthermore, even if Brussels DID demand that the UK agree to take the Euro like all new joining members, there are loopholes that allow a member state to agree to that but then never finish the process. Sweden for example.
Nothing is guaranteed, but the official standpoint from EU is that UK will NOT get a special deal. And participation in the Euro is the default.
So UK will technically be obligated to join the Euro.
Sweden came in under other terms back in 1995, much has changed since, and such exceptions will not be likely to be accepted today.
Hungary joined in 2004 and is using the same loophole. I've seen or heard nothing to suggest that the loophole has ever been done away with.
I don't think Hungary is using a loophole, seems more likely that Hungary doesn't qualify for the Euro ATM.
Much the same way there were speculations that Greece might have to leave the Euro.
The Euro can be mandatory for new member states without being mandatory for existing members.
If UK had remained in the EU, they would have kept ALL their special arrangements without problems.
Sweden doesn't qualify for the euro either. That's the loophole. They're failing the qualification criteria on purpose, because (they argue) joining ERM II is optional.
I also don't think that a country and economy as important as the UK would be treated like any member. The UK can probably get some of its favorable treatment back. The only absolute red line seems to be the Three Freedoms.
Oh, and the regulatory and judicial framework, too. That was a huge sticking point during Brexit, when they rejected the May proposal over the ECJ having final say on disputes over Northern Ireland.
If Britain were to return to a pre-Brexit state today, it may look more like what Switzerland has: regulatory alignment and freedom of movement, though outside the increasingly tightly integrated bloc.
The UK were never a partner of the free movement, you'd have to dig out your passport every time you were entering their country and I doubt freedom of movement would be on the top of their list of things they'd want from a partnership with the EU
Not quite pre-Brexit, because it is not the same as a membership, but I agree that the realistic near future is increased cooperation between UK and EU, and something like Switzerland is a likely model. Which will mean UK will have to follow EU regulation, but will have zero influence on it.
gestures at current UK regulation and political situation
UK politics have been a shitshow as long as I can remember.
Count Binface will sort it out.
Yes, there is hope of that. π
There's not even a majority in the current EU for 4, but there will soon be a majority for 1-3, even in the UK.
no poll on reentering is worth anything
You may as well have just posted that, to be honest. It doesnt matter what people want.
Please, no. The UK held the EU back. They'd had to change their political system first. We don't need them pushing Chat Control and other crap in the EU too.
Look no further than the EU to push chat control by themselves.
Doesn't mean we need to invite another country that's pro total surveillance.
Europe says 'no' π
Far from it. From day 1 the EU is happy to have them back
But the UK can absolutely forget about all the special rules and exceptions it has before
The biggest thing would be saying goodbye to the pound
So Europe says NO
That's called a hard no.
Maybe for the British. For the EU is basically what any other applicant has to go through