Carryfast:
Firstly it seems clear that at worse Merkel is part of a Socialist plan of infiltration of Europe using the inherent flaws contained within the Federal government system to do it.
Most socialists complain that the EU is too pro-capitalist, but I have no objection to socialism in the sense of promoting a European-wide society that is fair, civilised, and stable.
Those flaws giving people like her and Junker a disproportionate amount of power in which she unarguably has more powers to determine UK policy than my local MP has.While at best the Federal system still means that the only input which we have is totally dependent on,and can be cancelled out by,majority Federal vote among the other member states.IE at best we still have no electoral control over government policy.
But how is that different to how the British government has more power than your local MP? And like I say, the devolution of sovereignty does not in fact give more power to local leaders, because they still have to battle with the local leaders of other areas, all of whom are looking to get their own way and do everyone else down.
As I say, it’s an almost childish failure to reason about the consequences of how your own policies, when also implemented by foreigners who you have set up as your opponents, leads to ruin for everybody.
That is exactly what led to two world wars in Europe, because each nation wouldn’t stop trying to get the other over the barrel, which is doomed to failure because your opponents just match everything you do, and everything you do at their expense, they do at your expense in return - and in the process, the resources that could be used to give us good lives are wasted in this ruinous and rancorous competition.
The only good thing to come out of the second world war was that it showed the power of the state, when directed appropriately, to organise and provide what Victorian free-market capitalism had not.
While your case is obviously based on the idea that we can no longer govern ourselves and therefore can no longer exist as a nation state.
No, it’s based on the idea that the only government that is worthwhile is the government that governs others! France governed itself before WW2, and then Germany (which also governed itself) kicked the door in - and who was going to tell it otherwise?
Good government is one which governs us all in our own interests and creates a decent civilised society for us to enjoy. A gaggle of supposedly self-governing nations, all knocking ten bells out of each other, is not good government.
While all the examples which you’ve provided,concerning any so called downsides of national sovereignty,are all based on what happens when Federalism and/or Socialism takes over.In which case the usual result being that unlike Nationalism the idea of the right of self determination of others gets thrown out the window.
Oh come on, get real! The EU was created as the solution to the problems of national sovereignty. The national “socialism” that took over in Germany was because its economy was already on its arse, and if not national socialism and fighting other nations, then there was going to be class war and the rich giving up their extremes of wealth and backward free-market economics (which is ultimately what happened anyway after the war).
Bearing in mind that it was the German Federal government system,allied to his version of Socialism which brought Hitler to power.Which then predictably and true to form attempted to trample all over the right to self determination and sovereignty of the neighbouring countries.IE Federalism/Socialism is the problem and Nationalism is the solution not vice versa.
But that is always what self-determining, inward-looking governments do in a crisis! Hitler didn’t cause Germany’s economic problems (which, as today, were occurring globally) - he was the proposed solution! The alternative was to attack the European rich to solve the problem through redistribution and economic reorganisation, so the rich especially promoted Hitler because he wasn’t in fact a socialist in any left-wing sense (those all went to the new concentration camps in 1933) and nor were the rest of his crew.
As for Enoch Powell he made it very clear that his previous support of ‘Commonwealth’ immigration was a mistake.
Don’t the Tories always. Crocodile tears! They tear up social security or employment laws which protect people’s standard of living and ameliorate both the attraction of immigration (e.g. undercutting going rates, and reducing training costs) and its effects (reduced employment to go around), and then it’s “boo hoo, we’re sorry”.
When the conditions within those treaties contain exactly that form of government.