Progressive arguments for staying in the EU

[butchersapron]

One way not to keep them is to allow them to be given top-down by something like the EU.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

One way not to keep them is to allow them to be given top-down by something like the EU.

Or something like the UK government, for that matter. I don't see how that's an argument for substituting the EU with Westminster.

 

[DotCommunist]

I suppose you could ask what rights and victories secured by labour over time have been saved from capitals erosion/watering down by the EU. Or restored. Certainly I don't recall the EU being able to block passage of the latest anti-union legislation.

 

[butchersapron]

Or something like the UK government, for that matter. I don't see how that's an argument for substituting the EU with Westminster.

It's an argument about how rights are taken not given. So it can't be applied as a pro-eu argument either.

 

[butchersapron]

I suppose you could ask what rights and victories secured by labour over time have been saved from capitals erosion/watering down by the EU. Or restored. Certainly I don't recall the EU being able to block passage of the latest anti-union legislation.

Saved? What is their function? It really really is not to save labour rights. It's to extend and facilitate their erosion.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

It's an argument about how rights are taken not given. So it can't be applied as a pro-eu argument either.

Not so much 'pro-eu' as 'anti-leaving-the-eu-on-these-terms'. They're not quite the same thing. If there are concrete things that are likely to happen on leaving the EU, those things can be an argument against leaving that in no way thinks of the EU as a force for good. 'Less negative', perhaps, and not necessarily worse than the UK nation state.

And there are concrete things. I've given one example, but there are lots of others. For many workers, it will be a fight just to stay still.

 

[butchersapron]

Not so much 'pro-eu' as 'anti-leaving-the-eu-on-these-terms'. They're not quite the same thing. If there are concrete things that are likely to happen on leaving the EU, those things can be an argument against leaving that in no way thinks of the EU as a force for good. 'Less negative', perhaps, and not necessarily worse than the UK nation state.

And there are concrete things. I've given one example, but there are lots of others. For many workers, it will be a fight just to stay still.

Are these concrete things? Every legal right that we've had to write into our own laws, that had to be passed by parliament, will then be gone? Will no longer have any legal basis?

 

[butchersapron]

Not so much 'pro-eu' as 'anti-leaving-the-eu-on-these-terms'. They're not quite the same thing. If there are concrete things that are likely to happen on leaving the EU, those things can be an argument against leaving that in no way thinks of the EU as a force for good. 'Less negative', perhaps, and not necessarily worse than the UK nation state.

And there are concrete things. I've given one example, but there are lots of others. For many workers, it will be a fight just to stay still.

You used to think the eu was a force for good. Do you not now?

 

[butchersapron]

Is there a progressive argument for the CBI? What would we do without it?

 

[redsquirrel]

There is one such strategy, that followers of Trotsky fall back on when thery're losing an argument, but which only the RCP (afaik) came clean about.

There will only - can only - be a revolution, they say, when the conditions of life of the working class are dire enough that the class is forced into it.

In one long word: immiserationism.

Hence, for example, the RCP attempted to sabotage campaigns against hospital closures, declaring this activity counter-revolutionary.

Over the years I've heard many followers advance arguments for leaving the EU that boil down to this. They would rather impose on the working class the purity of real, naked, US neo-liberalism and see what rises from the ashes. Usually while doing this they claimed some exclusive right to define what is "socialist".

And who on U75 P&P is making such an argument?

 

[butchersapron]

And who on U75 P&P is making such an argument?

Latop has been tricked. It doesn't exist.

 

[Sasaferrato]

perhaps its time to start thinking about lesser evils being positive?

while the EU has become a vastly more neo-liberal structure than it was previously, it is still a less neo-liberal structure than significant elements within the body politic would like it to be. it, some extent, places a break on the ability of those elements to do what they would like.

moreover, if the UK voted to leave the EU, not only would those breaks - limited as they are - be removed, but the internal politics within the UK would change: it looks pretty certain that Scotland would again hold an indyref, which this time would pass, meaning that at a stroke those 50 non-tory seats would disappear taking the tory majority from its current 17 to the best part of 70. not, i would think, something that would have no impact on its ability to pass legislation.

then, post referendum, you'd have to ask whether its likely that an electorate that had just voted for a xenophobic, insular, 'stop the EU getting in the way of business' proposal in a referendum would be an electorate that would turn around and vote for a non-xenophobic, non-insular, non neo-liberal government. if you think it would, i have an off-plan, beach front home in Northamptonshire that you might like to buy...

it very much seems to me that you can either have a foot of shit, or 2 feet of shit. there are, i'm sure, people who will say that there is no difference between one foot of shit and two feet of shit - however these people can probably be safely described as idiots, and moreover idiots who've never had to live in two feet of shit.

The Nazis can hold as many referenda as they like, it will not be binding on Westminster.

 

[butchersapron]

The Nazis can hold as many referenda as they like, it will not be binding on Westminster.

Just in case

 

[Sasaferrato]

I'm sure that's comforting for the Greeks, who have been on the receiving end of the 'progressive' EU doing just that.


So we end up with the status quo, a neo-liberal EU which reflects the majority neo-liberal governments that make it up. 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. 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.

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.

The whole of Europe is drifting right, pretty much. What makes you think that the palpably risible institution of 'socialism' will ever be successful again? (Not that it has ever been successful, anywhere in the world,at any time previously.).

 

[butchersapron]

The whole of Europe is drifting right, pretty much. What makes you think that the palpably risible institution of 'socialism' will ever be successful again? (Not that it has ever been successful, anywhere in the world,at any time previously.).

The mass left votes across southern europe don't figure in your tale?

edit: why did i bother?

 

[Cid]

Which are?

State aids. And anything that doesn't tend toward market liberalisation.

 

[fredfelt]

The question I would like to ask is where did these EU-level protections arise from? Are they present because labour is strong enough on a European scale to push for them? Or are they just vestiges of a post-war social-democratic impulse, soon to be eroded as corporate interests capture more and more of the EUs institutional power.

In other words, if we end up staying in the EU, how do we ensure that those worker protections are not stolen from us at some point anyway? What democratic forms exist for us to exact influence on the decision makers to prevent this?

That's a good question. I'd like to better understand how the power of legislative bodies of the democratically elected EU government combine with the legislative bodies of a European nation state - and how this interaction leads to our current worker protections.

My feeling is that the size of the EU has to help with the institution being better able to resist the political influence of corporations than a single state. I've no doubt that corporate interests have an unhealthy influence at both a European and a national level - but I have more confidence in the European parliament maintaining worker rights than a single sovereign state.

TTIP scares me, and if this trade agreement is adopted I'll give up all hope I have in Europe. However I have little confidence that the UK, operating as a sovereign state and out of the EU, can fare much better if it ever attempts to square up against corporate power. Now that we have handed over so much power to corporations, as a deliberate part of National and European policy, it's going to be hugely difficult for any former European state to start to take back control.

 

[Ax^]

Michael Gove and Boris are supporting an exit

just to spite them two cunts

stay in

 

[J Ed]

Michael Gove and Boris are supporting an exit

just to spite them two cunts

stay in

Yeah, go with Goldman Sachs, HSBC, Santander (insert every other financial insitution here) and David Cameron instead

 

[J Ed]

I have to say that (I refuse to call him Boris like he's my mate) Johnson has made a v good decision by coming out for leaving the EU, he is being attacked by everyone that the public, not to mention Tory activists, hates. Will get him a lot of kudos for the coming leadership election.

 

[The39thStep]

There is one such strategy, that followers of Trotsky fall back on when thery're losing an argument, but which only the RCP (afaik) came clean about.

There will only - can only - be a revolution, they say, when the conditions of life of the working class are dire enough that the class is forced into it.

In one long word: immiserationism.

Hence, for example, the RCP attempted to sabotage campaigns against hospital closures, declaring this activity counter-revolutionary.

Over the years I've heard many followers advance arguments for leaving the EU that boil down to this. They would rather impose on the working class the purity of real, naked, US neo-liberalism and see what rises from the ashes. Usually while doing this they claimed some exclusive right to define what is "socialist".

Can you explain the bit about the RCP a bit more please ?

 

[Ax^]

Yeah, go with Goldman Sachs, HSBC, Santander (insert every other financial insitution here) and David Cameron instead

true I'll reply in more detail in due course...

*gets coat*

 

[ItWillNeverWork]

That's a good question. I'd like to better understand how the power of legislative bodies of the democratically elected EU government combine with the legislative bodies of a European nation state - and how this interaction leads to our current worker protections.

My feeling is that the size of the EU has to help with the institution being better able to resist the political influence of corporations than a single state. I've no doubt that corporate interests have an unhealthy influence at both a European and a national level - but I have more confidence in the European parliament maintaining worker rights than a single sovereign state.

TTIP scares me, and if this trade agreement is adopted I'll give up all hope I have in Europe. However I have little confidence that the UK, operating as a sovereign state and out of the EU, can fare much better if it ever attempts to square up against corporate power. Now that we have handed over so much power to corporations, as a deliberate part of National and European policy, it's going to be hugely difficult for any former European state to start to take back control.

What makes you think the EU even wants to "resist the political influence of corporations"? What if those two power blocks are one and the same?

 

[butchersapron]

.

My feeling is that the size of the EU has to help with the institution being better able to resist the political influence of corporations than a single state.

And also any citizens voter or ignore or any mandate,

This is appalling authoritarian stuff.

 

[butchersapron]

Can you explain the bit about the RCP a bit more please ?

We both know that it's not true. I don't know why you keep going on about it laptop. It's bollocks.

 

[butchersapron]

TTIP scares me, and if this trade agreement is adopted I'll give up all hope I have in Europe.

I doubt it. You've managed to swallow everything else thus far. The devastation of greece, the taking over of spain via the constitution, ok but TTIP - no chance. Drawing a line here.

 

[irf520]

And also any citizens voter or ignore or any mandate,

This is appalling authoritarian stuff.

The perennial problem. A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take away everything you have.

 

[butchersapron]

The perennial problem. A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take away everything you have.

And shitty content free aphorisms.

 

[butchersapron]

The perennial problem. A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take away everything you have.

When has the latter half ever happened btw?

 

[stavros]

lol, former education secretary Michael Gove can't even do joined-up writing.

One step at a time. He needs to master joined-up thinking first.