Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Progressive arguments for staying in the EU

It's not about whether this is true or not. It's about whether the EU integrated version of this is better or worse than the isolated domestic one, in any living timeframe. That's why totting up achievements matters.
For liberals like you maybe. For those of us that are socialist the neo-liberal nature of the EU should always be present in our minds whatever we decide about voting. I think a quote from a link killer b gave to Jacobin magazine (about the Democrats in the US but equally relevant here) sums it up better than I could.
First, working-class insurgency is the only force that renders the contradictions between capitals dynamic and capable of serving the Left. Second, whatever power labor manages to assert against capital, whether on the shop floor, in a capitalist party like the Democrats, or even in an actual social-democratic party, will always be partial, and subject to dismemberment as soon as capital is able.
This, especially the first part it is for me the key - and should be for any socialist. What the achievements of the British (or European for that matter) Left are I don't care, it's the working class that is important.
 
Last edited:
Let me put it another way.

It's not a strategic choice over what will aid the struggle for workers rights and best accelerate us on our paths to an equitable and just society blah blah blah.

It's how many times you want to be fucked before you're smashed over the head for the last time, rolled in a carpet and thrown in a fucking ditch.

That's the status of the British left. They/we/whatever are not in any position to dictate or leverage anything meaningful in this context for the foreseeable future. Where's the history? Where's the track record? Where's the influence? Where's the votes? How much of the public gives a demonstrable shit about anything you have to say, on its own never mind when given any opposition?

It makes me properly angry that we're indulging in academic arguments about the textbook politics of the thing, when to do so means being wilfully and forcefully blind to the utterly miserable prospects that we already have and will continue to have in anyone's imagination. It is ALL about the least shit of the options and if we can't operate on that basis instead of absolutes then the next kicking is going to be a deserved one.
Yes.
It is simply a 'choice' regarding the delivery method of accelerated neo-liberalism. One faction of financialised capital see benefits in concealing the reality of their consolidator state Atlanticism behind the sham veneer of nationalistic 'democracy'. Others favour the technocratic, post-democracy of the supra-state as the means of liberating capital from any democratic accountability or social responsibility.

Shit sarnie, either way...just different bread.
 
Let me put it another way.

It's not a strategic choice over what will aid the struggle for workers rights and best accelerate us on our paths to an equitable and just society blah blah blah.
Then we don't have anything else to say. I don't want what you want. Your aims are not my aims.

EDIT: If the 'strategic choice over what will aid the struggle for workers rights' isn't the primary objective of socialists what is.
 
Last edited:
Now that the Tories pinkwash their neoliberalism and some Eastern European states are outdoing Putin in the homophobia stakes I don't think that you can play the 'well this neoliberalism is bad but at least you're better off as a woman, LGBT person, ethnic minority etc so we need to stay in'.
 
For balance, in response to the OP..

I have only one instinct on the EU, and it is that we must stay

It is time to make my position on the EU clear.

Let me state the obvious: the EU is deeply flawed by design. Any arrangement that provides equal rights on the movement of capital and labour when one is inherently more mobile than the other is bound to favour returns to capital over returns to labour, and so it has been. The period during which the UK has been a member of the EU has coincided with a period when there has been a massive bias to capital across almost every part of the political spectrum with inevitable, unjust and unjustifiable consequences. And nothing that David Cameron is doing is helping change that: indeed, he has put reinforcement of the rights of the City of London at the very heart of his campaign as if they did not already enjoy privilege enough.

Second, let me be clear that in recent years there have been policies proposed by a German dominated European a Central Bank that are abhorrent to any right minded person let alone any right minded economist. The treatment of Greece makes it all too clear that the lessons of Versailles in 1919 have been forgotten at direct cost to Greek people and, indirectly, the rest of us as the perverted logic of austerity persists with official endorsement.

Third, some policies that are embedded in the EU, like the common agricultural policy, make no sense in the twenty first century.

And, importantly, democratic accountability within the EU is weak, and since that issue is at the heart of much of what I argue I have to be concerned about that.

Despite which reservations I oppose Brexit and have no doubt that I will be voting to stay in the EU whenever we have a referendum on the issue. So let me explain why that is.

First the EU has, in my opinion, delivered union where there was once conflict. I do not take that lightly. And I think the risk of conflict has not gone away, but is reduced by the continuing existence of the EU. I think that absolutely fundamental in the debate to come.

Second, I am a member of an extended family that is only in the UK because of economic migrancy. I think my extended family has added value to this country. I think many other economically migrant families do. Of course there are issues with migration: the rate at which integration of people into communities is possible is an issue, but let’s never doubt that, firstly, the right to live and work elsewhere in the EU suits millions of UK citizens who would lose it if we left; secondly that the most problematic migration we now face arises from humanitarian need and leaving the EU will not change that and, third, many parts of the UK economy would be lost without EU migrant workers. Walking away is no way to solve migration issues.

Third, leaving the EU will indisputably and inevitably make it harder to trade from the UK and as a trading nation we would be mad to impose such a constraint on ourselves. If we want to be worse off, leaving the EU makes sense. And there is no upside: an imposed TTIP would be worse for the UK in every way. To pretend that there is some economic utopia by pretending the UK could operate as the proverbial corner shop standing up against a globalised world is to take heed of the machinations of a febrile mind.

Fourth, there may be weaknesses in EU democracy but it has achieved some pretty good things. No organisation has done more to help crack down on tax abuse. It is intent on delivering more and note who it is who is really taking on multinationals on this issue: we could not do what the EU can to the likes of Apple. And the protection for workers that has come from Brussels has taken labour rights forward by leaps and bounds. There is no doubt that many in the Brexit camp are intent on taking away these rights that have made life better for millions and reduced, if not as yet by enough, the inequalities in our society.

Fifth, argue if you will that the EU does not do democracy but it has got an inter-state parliament. In a global world that is an indication of cooperation that is unique. It is flawed. It could and should be improved. But let’s stop pretending anyone gets all they want in life: imperfect as it is the EU delivers more for international cooperation in a democratic form than we can expect to achieve any other way.

Finally, for now, let’s note that Brexit is, almost certainly, the precursor for the end of the Union too: Scotland would be holding another referendum on leaving the UK faster than you could imagine if Brexit happens, and don’t rule out Northern Ireland pondering its future as well. To say Brexit is literally a little England view is to be kind to it.

I could, and no doubt will, expand these themes over time. But the point is, this is ultimately a decision to be taken by instinct. All big decisions in life are. And there is no doubt that in that context I have only one instinct, and that is that we must stay.
 
A cohesive continent-wide approach to regional and global issues, e.g. fundamentalism, tax dodging, climate change.

is that some kind of utopian wish list for a future fantasy EU ?

reality is TTIP, stamping on a human face, forever
 
Just to be clear, I think you can make a case for voting stay from a socialist perspective. I don't find those arguments convincing enough for me to vote stay (if I vote at all it will be leave), but I can appreciate those arguments, and that the people making them are comrades.

What I have utter contempt for is the liberal nonsense of a progressive EU that forms the basis for so much of the stay camp's arguments.
 
It seems to me that we can't effect any change in our own governments whilst they are part of the wider EU neo-liberal project.
Really? Can you honestly attribute the ongoing failures of the left, or even a large proportion of those failures, to the existence of the EU? i.e. that they would have done better in the last 20-30 years had Britain been out? I don't think so. Maybe that's where we differ.

But we can at least try and destabilise neo-liberalism and pursue pro-socialist and pro-worker politics on individual governmental levels again if they're out. This is why I think Greece would have done better ultimately to come out of the EU so it could regain some of its own autonomy, instead of being beaten to a pulp by the EU demanding deeper austerity.
Can we? Tied in with the question above, why couldn't you do that domestically now? When did you run into UK government ever saying, 'well we'd like to meet your demands, but EU rules say no'? Meanwhile, is it not sporadically the opposite?

I've grappled with this 'shit choice' for years, always siding on the 'to stay in' because I fear what our own government, especially under the Tories will do when out of the EU. The Greek situation completely changed that for me. I still derive more hope that over time, the left can begin to fightback more successfully when they are not having to fight not only neo-liberal, right-wing governments, but also the weight of the neo-liberal EU also flexxing its weight and trying to police everybody in line. It might be a pipedream and I have no real solutions as to how things might be achieved, but it's surely more likely to give rise to the opportunity to shift things to the left than sticking with the status quo and hoping the EU will be a 'moderating influence'. It's not.
I haven't missed the Greek situation's relevance in all this. I wrote about it on a similar thread. But as I said then, whilst the EU lost a lot of credibility, and I mean a lot - it was an eye opener - noone gained any elsewhere. You say pipedream and I agree. If someone was advancing a credible strategy, you might well coax me out, but I don't see one. We have a re-elected Tory government and a lack of clarity as to whether we have a workable opposition at all, never mind one with meaningfully aligned views, never mind one that can win. The situation is dire.
 
Oh god we have four month of liberals lining up to fellate David Cameron because he will save their neoliberalism with a European face. It's enough to make you want to emigrate...
 
CbqrgORW8AA5B1s.jpg
 
Oh god we have four month of liberals lining up to fellate David Cameron because he will save their neoliberalism with a European face. It's enough to make you want to emigrate...
looking orward to the New Statesman articles already lol
 
Really! You're going to try and claim that after Greece (and Spain, Italy etc). FFS.
I didn't describe the EU as "nice 'progressive' form of capitalism", you did, I just quoted it. What I said previously was "it is fully wedded to neo-liberalism, of course it is.".

I'll repeat that of the real alternatives facing us, EU capitalism or US capitalism, the EU form has been and is less brutal and more likely to be amenable to both protection of the interests of workers and engaged in using public money for the benefit of the public. The US model, and it's Atlanticist UK followers who dominate Leave, does not believe in using public money for much other than law enforcement, prisons and war. Everything else is profit centered. Not for socialised medicine, pensions or schools, not for a welfare state, not for environmental or safety regulations, and so on and so on.

What is or is not progressive is arguable, obviously, but there are issues I'd suggest are litmus tests.

Opt-outs: free movement obviously but also "the UK was worried that the Charter might be used to alter British labour law, especially as relates to allowing more strikes" and so on.

TTIP is crucial tmm. It's about forcing the US model of capitalism on Europe, including the fundamental notion that regulation and social policy should not stand in the way of 'investors'. The EU is neogtiating- I don't trust them to deliver much. In the event of Brexit I trust the Tories far, far, far less.

Remember the Financial Transaction Tax (Tobin)? Vetoed by the UK. Most of the major EU economies are working towards some sort of implementation. They want to reign in the power of finance capital, not push 'light touch'.

And Greece. Very important, although the somewhat singular example of the fallout from massively corrupt and inept Greek governments doesn't trump absolutely everything else, at least in my mind.

There are probably many more, but as I said up there somewhere, I don't have the time or ability to list them all. There are also perfectly good arguments against the EU but fantasies about worker states isn't one of them.
 
I didn't describe the EU as "nice 'progressive' form of capitalism", you did, I just quoted it. What I said previously was "it is fully wedded to neo-liberalism, of course it is.".
And then went on to defend it, repeatedly, by dividing from the horrible Anglo-Saxon capitalism.

There are probably many more, but as I said up there somewhere, I don't have the time or ability to list them all. There are also perfectly good arguments against the EU but fantasies about worker states isn't one of them.
Sorry who mentioned workers states. FFS first you're calling people Tories now this.
 
And then went on to defend it, repeatedly, by dividing from the horrible Anglo-Saxon capitalism.

Sorry who mentioned workers states. FFS first you're calling people Tories now this.
apologies, I'm not trying to personalise, or to put words in your mouth and I'm certainly not calling you or anyone else a Tory.

But yes, i do distinguish between Atlanticist and continental modes of capitalism. Since the last referendum the UK has trodden a path with aspects of both, but I'd suggest that many, probably most, of the progressive aspects are imported from the continent and an awful lot of the negatives from the US. It's also plausible that the EU would have a different, and more progressive, complection if our government hadn't been so consistently reactionary and self serving.
 
I know there's a bit of Brexit support amongst the left, but what's the arguments for staying in? Plenty of UK workers want the freedom of labour movement as they live and work in Europe too and then there's labour laws that would be worse without the EU most probably and the human rights act.

What else, if anything?

European court of human rights is a separate thing from the EU. We could leave the latter and still retain access to the former.

As for free movement, there's no reason we couldn't leave the EU and still allow free movement of EU citizens across our borders, as the Swiss do, or allow free movement of everyone come to think of it. Obviously with the political landscape as it is most anti-EU voters would want and expect an exit from the EU to go hand in hand with tighter border controls, but that doesn't necessarily need to happen.

Lots of EU laws like the maximum working time directive are basically ignored or loopholed around in the UK, but there are still some important protections we would probably lose if we weren't in the EU. But it seems to me that most of the pro-EU arguments would be moot if we had a moderately decent government of our own. Which admittedly is a pretty big if.
 
Worse than that anyone arguing against the EU appears to be simultaneously both a Tory and far-left Citizen Smith.

Already an established trope now, thanks to the Corbyn election. If you are on the 'far-left' you are a misogynist and racist (by way of anti-Semitism) it really is evidence that the ruling class has nothing to offer whatsoever in defence of the status quo, the only thing they have now is the denigration of detractors of their neoliberalism.
 
one half of the British establishment. The other half wants to tear up the rules and take control.

I'm going out, back later.
 
one half of the British establishment. The other half wants to tear up the rules and take control.
Sorry but this idea that the EU is the only thing holding back capital is not just nonsense, it's dangerous. I've quoted it before but I'll do it again because it can't be said too many times
working-class insurgency is the only force that renders the contradictions between capitals dynamic and capable of serving the Left.
 
as i've said on one of the other threads, i really don't know.

my initial gut feeling is that if david cameron wants something, it must be wrong.

but then when IDS and gove and the biggest right wing twunts on the tory back benches want the other thing, that must be even more wrong.

:(
 
Back
Top Bottom