Features

America would never join anything like the EU. Yet they urge us to stay

The average Trump voter doesn’t like Congress, but would hate an expensive international parliament even more

20 February 2016

9:00 AM

20 February 2016

9:00 AM

So the US Secretary of State, John Kerry, thinks his country has a ‘profound interest… in a very strong United Kingdom staying in a strong EU’, and President Obama is planning to join in campaigning for the Remainders too. They say this not because they think it is good for us, but because it is in their interests that we influence Europe in a free-trading, Atlanticist direction.

Well, two can play at that game. How would Americans like it if we argued that it is in our interests that the United States should forthwith be united with all the countries in their continent north of the Panama Canal — Canada, Mexico, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, Belize, Honduras, El Salvador and Panama — into a vast customs union governed by a trans-national, unelected civil service. Let’s call it the American Union, or AU.

Imagine that Britain’s Foreign Secretary has just made a speech in Toronto saying he thinks America should join the AU in order to influence Mexico in the direction of free trade. The great and the good in America agree, because they think being part of the ten-country AU will prevent war, boost trade, help smaller nations compete with the behemoths of Europe and China, enable free movement of people, stand up to Russia, encourage scientific co-operation and ensure environmental protection.

Above all, we argue, it would show the world that America is not small-minded, xenophobic, protectionist and isolationist. To this end we think the AU should — er — agree a common tariff against imports from the poorer countries of South America and have free movement of peoples within but not from outside the union. We also think the United States should give up the dollar and use a common currency issued in central America, called the auro, sometimes known as the oreo, or if it is not ready to do that, should encourage others to use the auro, even though there is limited fiscal harmonisation, which bodes ill for the single currency. Oh, and the flag of the AU, consisting of ten radial yellow stripes on a blue background, should be prominently displayed alongside the Stars and Stripes.

[Alt-Text]


Unfortunately, in the current political climate, it turns out that these manifest advantages, deliciously attractive though they might be to the American elite, because they offer an escape from having to think about people in places like Iowa and New Hampshire, apparently do not have quite the same appeal to the American electorate. People are worried about Mexicans taking their jobs, using their health care and drawing upon their welfare if they join the AU. And about Panamanians running up deficits, Guatemalans passing laws that affect Americans and Nicaraguans sharing a common foreign policy.

The average Trump voter might not like Congress much, but he likes the idea of an expensive international parliament that shuttles between Mexico City and Vancouver even less, and of an international executive whose directives pass automatically into law still less, let alone one whose corridors of power are positively seething with lobbyists from big business and big pressure groups (funded by the AU to lobby it). As for the idea that the US Supreme Court could be overruled by judges sitting in Toronto or Managua…

Yes, yes, but not to worry. Mr Kerry and Mr Obama agree the AU is not perfect and should be reformed before America joins. Indeed, let’s suppose they have spent the past few months shuttling between the capitals of North and Central America to achieve this. The results have been disappointing and tend to show just how hard it is to get agreement to change anything as unwieldy as the AU, but no matter, we would advise the Americans to go ahead and join anyway. It’s in our interest that they do so.

Perhaps you think my analogy unfair? We are already in the EU, whereas I am suggesting that America joins the — currently fictional — AU. So what? Surely the decision is identical. If the AU/EU is worth joining, then it’s not worth leaving, and vice versa. Perhaps you feel the cultural and economic differences between Seattle and Tegucigalpa are greater than between Manchester and Athens. I don’t agree. Perhaps you think it unrealistic to expect such a big country as America to subsume itself into such an arrangement. Well, Britain is vastly bigger than many very successful, independent countries and has the fifth largest economy in the world. America could expect to boss the AU far more than we get our way in the EU.

Perhaps you think America should be more concerned with building free trade and good relations with people on other continents, rather than the countries that happen to be next door: that is, with China, Russia, Brazil, Europe. In which case, don’t you think the same is true for Britain? Silicon Valley has benefited from a flow of talent from the Indian subcontinent — precisely what we have denied our creative industries here as we struggle to control immigration overall but are not allowed to restrict numbers from one particular landmass.

There is a serious point here. Most Americans I know think Britain would be mad to leave the EU, but that’s because they think the EU is like Nato or Nafta or the Organisation of American States — a club of nations bound by a treaty. They think it is a trading bloc. They do not appreciate that it is a common government, run by a common bureaucracy and answerable to a common court system. Once you explain this, by using the analogy I just used, they get it immediately. They would never join the AU in a million years.

And then pause to consider the irony of America, a country born in rebellion against being governed by others through a democratic deficit, lecturing the British on how we should stay inside the EU. The chairman of Conservatives for Britain, Steve Baker MP had this to say about John Kerry’s remarks: ‘I refer Mr Kerry to the US Declaration of Independence. We will do peacefully at the ballot box that for which his nation fought a war of bloody insurrection. If the USA must express a view on the UK’s right to the separate and equal status among the nations of the world to which many of us feel entitled, perhaps they might consider whether they wish to discuss their back taxes.’

Put your money where your mouth is, Mr Kerry. Unite your own continent into a superstate first before you tell us to do the same.

Subscribe to The Spectator today for a quality of argument not found in any other publication. Get more Spectator for less – just £12 for 12 issues.


Show comments
  • Sean Raymond

    I really do fail to see where the debate is on this historic vote – one which will likely be the most important of our lives – and also the easiest one. To vote to stay in the EU will be to sign away your freedom to hire and fire the makers of laws that you are governed by and to hand it over to unaccountable bureaucrats whom are immune to the ballot box. Willingly giving away your national sovereignty and personal democracy to people that you will never have voted in and whom you can never vote out is an act I simply cannot fathom. Why would anyone give away their liberty?

    • Leon Wolfeson

      Ah, so you argue that no treaty can or should ever be made by Britain.

      You deny British Parliamentary Sovereignty, and whine that only utter “isolationism means liberty”. As you don’t think, just praise poverty. The debate’s there, you refuse to engage in it, preferring those slogans (with a bunch of junk, too)!

      • Sean Raymond

        Stop trolling. You are making no sense in your replies to me and I have no idea why you are now combing my comments history commenting on things said months ago – replies which bear no resemblance to anything I have said.

        • Leon Wolfeson

          I am not following your policies. I am not blindly agreeing with your lies – I agree there – as you admit you have “no idea” why anyone might not hate Britain, censor, in your dislike of debate.

          As you show you can’t count, and complain that facts bear no resemblance to your whining. Hmm!

        • Brimstone52

          It’s what he does. He’s a silly little boy.

        • UKSteve

          Because he is a very well-known and annoying tr0ll.

      • Mr B J Mann

        You don’t half dribble far and wide, noeL nosefloW

        • Leon Wolfeson

          Look, your issues with your alternate personalities are and remain yours.
          Parliamentary Sovereignty still exists.

          • Mr B J Mann

            Stick to tissues, noeL nosefloW!

            Euwwwwwch: you have stuck to them!!

            GROSS!!!!!!!!!!!!

          • Leon Wolfeson

            Your Ms. Mann personality is a drama queen, sneezing is not that big an event.
            Said it before.

            Parliamentary Sovereignty still exists.

          • Mr B J Mann

            V.. ,,V .l.. 8< – – – – – –

          • Leon Wolfeson

            So whining, right, Drama Queen.

          • Mr B J Mann

            V.. ,,V .l.. 8< – – – –

          • Leon Wolfeson

            Spam whining, Drama Queen? Well, not really a question is it.

            Parliamentary Sovereignty still exists.

    • For Whom the Troll Bells

      The debate is because not everyone shares your view of things. You may be utterly convinced that you are right and hold that view honestly and sincerely, but the “remain” side has plenty of people who hold their view honestly and sincerely. If you cannot accept this then you are right – it isn’t a debate but just a one-sided rant.

      • Sean Raymond

        You really shouldn’t speculate. I am in no doubt to the sincerity of those who wish to remain. I actually just posted this very thing an hour ago on the ‘Camerons long awaited EU deal is here’ thread – go and look. So I have no idea why you assume I doubt it – nothing I said suggested this. Nonetheless my point was simple – voting to remain in the EU is to turn your back on national sovereignty and personal democracy. I can see no argument against this hence there I see no debate – the choice is easy. You can be sincere in your argument against this however it is irrelevant – I believe such a position to be unfathomable. You clearly disagree – so then I urge you, right now, to please put forward your argument to me on why I should give up my self governance and vote stay. I have said why I will vote leave – where’s your rebuttal? If you are convincing I assure you I will not be pig headed – I will vote to stay. Away you go…

        • For Whom the Troll Bells

          You started by saying that you couldn’t see where the debate was then asked “where is the debate?”. If you can’t see where the debate is you can’t possibly say that you don’t doubt the sincerity of those who have different views to you – if there’s no debate, there’s no counter views. If you can’t see where the debate is, you have either been asleep for the past decade or have a closed mind.

          • Sean Raymond

            Good grief. I have made my point clear – making a concious vote against democracy makes no sense – to me. If you wish to go round in circles – be my guest. But that you cannot actual mount a response to my argument is very telling – and sort of proves my point. Make the case for why I should sign away my democracy – this is a very easy proposition for you to understand and one which I assume you must relish taking on otherwise why are you displaying such umbrage to my personal view?

          • For Whom the Troll Bells

            I take umbrage at your personal view because it shows so little respect for opposing views that you claim that there is no debate. My expectation is that most thinking, informed people think that there are pros and cons on both sides of the argument, and that the two cases are finely balanced.

            There are good arguments for “out” and I am by no means discounting them, particularly the issues of sovereignty and democracy that I spent almost half a decade defending, but I am also looking to the future as well as to the past.

            Here, in a tiny nutshell, is what I think the case for staying in is – you may not agree with but here it is:

            The world of the future will be dominated by a small number of rich and powerful blocs. The UK may be able to resist these today but our GDP as a proportion of the World’s GDP will become smaller and, increasingly, our influence, power and ability to act alone will reduce. I think we would be better off as part of one of the small number of rich and powerful blocs.

            Our economy depends to a large extent on our trade with the EU and it is by no means certain that we would be in as good a bargaining position with the rest of the World if we were outside the EU.

            The financial services sector based in London brings in huge wealth to this country. If we left the EU, it is likely that the rest of the World would move their financial hubs to an EU capital.

            The EU has a structure that is every bit as democratic as the UK’s. The problem is that MEPs do not operate it properly and, thus, allow the Commissioners too much power. That is fixable although it would mean MEPs attending EU Parliament sessions and engaging in debate.

            The problem with immigration is solvable whether we are in the EU or not, providing our politicians show some courage and resolve.

            Of course, we will give up some sovereignty as the EU develops, just as Texas gave up being an independent nation when it joined the USA. We are a nation formed from many other nations that no longer have any sovereignty but are infinitely better off for it – even the Scots voted against independence.

            Ok, you don’t agree with any of this, but at least recognise that there is a case for staying in as well as the one for getting out.

          • Mr B J Mann

            The world of the future may well be dominated by a small number of rich
            and powerful blocs, but why would they need to be political, as well as economic? Why would a member need to surrender political sovereignty?!

            And at the moment countries like Mexico get favoured nation status, yet the UK has to pay for the privilege of being not so favoured?!.

            As for influence, power and ability to act alone, the UK is a nuclear power, a leading member of NATO, a UN security council member, as well as the fifth biggest economic power in the world, this will not just reduce, but be diluted by being subsumed ever further into the EU and ever more subject to its control, control of dozens of smaller and much less important states, some, many, basket cases!

            And if you think the UK would be better off as part of one of the small number of rich and powerful blocs, why wouldn’t the UK be better off as part of the USA, the 51st State?! .

            As for the UK economy depending to a large extent on trade with the EU, surely it would be even better off with, say, Japan, China, or SE Asian economies?!

            It is by no means certain that the UK would be in as good a bargaining position with the rest of the World if it were inside the EU?!

            Surely we need an unbiased, rational, appraisal of the position vis a vis all possible trading block partnerships and not just blindly stick with the EU because we are afraid of the future and what dangers it might bring if we leave?!

            Especially as the UK financial services sector based in London brings in huge wealth to this country and if we stayed in the EU, it is likely that they would move their financial hub to Germany, and then the rest of the World would move their financial hubs to another EU capital.

            The EU does not have a structure that is every bit as democratic as the UK’s otherwise the MEPs would not have a problem making it operate properly and, thus, preventing the Commissioners exercising so much power.

            Not only is this not fixable, despite MEPs attending EU Parliament sessions and engaging in debate they are unable to change things!

            The problem with immigration is not solvable if we are in the EU as has been shown time and time again.

            Of course, the UK has already given up much sovereignty as the EU developed, and as ever closer union develops further this will only get worse.

            While Texas gave up being an independent nation when it joined the USA, it retained much control over local taxes and laws. In fact, it is illegal for the Federal government to interfere in many areas, while the EU can, and does interfere in many, if not most, areas of UK political and financial law.

            Ironically though the UK is a nation formed from many other nations, while those nations no longer have any sovereignty under the EU, are infinitely more sovereign within the UK, having their own parliaments, and even legal systems!

            Even the the Scots had a chance to vote for independence fro the UK before the UK had a chance to vote for independence from the EU!

            Ok, if you don’t agree with any of this, at least recognise that there was no case for going in as well as the one for getting out.

          • For Whom the Troll Bells

            And your point is? As my posts have made abundantly and explicitly clear, I recognise that the “out” case has considerable merit and that remaing in is not without some pain. My posts have also made it abundantly clear and explicit that I respect the views of the “outers”. If I have called an “outer” a traitor, gullible stooge, stupid, pathetic, insane or soemthing similar, please identfy where this occured.

          • Mr B J Mann

            If I have accused you of calling outers any of those things I apologise.

            Now, what was your actual argument again?!

          • For Whom the Troll Bells

            I’ve forgotten, but I know that it was in my posts so I am in good company, aren’t I?

          • Mr B J Mann

            Imaginary friends AND imaginary accusations!

          • For Whom the Troll Bells

            Well, we are as one in one thing – neither or us has the slightest clue what you are talking about.

          • Mr B J Mann

            So you just have the one imaginary friend then.

            Oh dear. How sad. Never mind.

      • Mr B J Mann

        So how many of the Remain side would agree to become the 51st state of the Union if it was shown to be more advantageous economically than remaining in the EU?!

        What’s the betting that the answer is NONE! ?!

        And that’s DESPITE also sharing a common language, legal system, Common Law, Bill of Rights, constitutional system………

    • Mr B J Mann

      Even the economic argument is a nonsense!

      I wonder how many of the supporters on staying IN because it’s supposedly to our economic advantage, would agree to a proper international analysis, and, if it’s even more advantageous to, say, join in an economic union with SE Asian countries, leaving the EU and joining them?

      Or, say, if it was economically more advantageous, rejoining the Commonwealth as a trading block?!

      Or, if it was the economically most advantageous option, becoming the 51st State of the Union?!

      What’s the betting NONE would agree to that however economically advantageous?!

  • smileoftdecade

    The analogy is teenage, not unfair –
    the USA is pretty much the equivalent of the EU, the state of California is bigger economically than any member state of the EU, Its a federal system that makes each state part of the federal org. – so comparing their “joining something like the EU” should be with the EU joining something like the USA…

    • Norse Notion No.9

      Really! Economical numbers are the primary similar vs different -arguments for you in a EU vs USA comparison?

      How about the degree of different cultural and national identity, history, sovereignty, and so on, forced together?
      Still thinks USA equals EU?

      • smileoftdecade

        did I say they were primary in showing similarity? – no I just chose an illustration of the size issue and the nature of federalism.
        and if you follow the arguments of modern day state separatists in the not very united states of America you might see some parallels that suit the arguments for leaving the EU…
        Culturally, as opposed to language, we have a lot of commonality within the EU, many people argue convincingly that we have much more in common with EU countries than with the USA
        – and when it comes to “Why the EU?” the answer is, the desire for peace that was the founding force and a much bigger reason for pursuing its better functioning than pathetic selfish Little Englander ideas that have more in common with Bundy/Palin thinking than our historic humanitarian drive.

        • Mr B J Mann

          Culturally, as opposed to language, we have a lot of commonality within
          the EU?

          The way the cultures of Europe and the UK share a belief in jury trial? Innocent until proven guilty? Not locking people up without showing due cause? The Common Law? Bill of Rights? Adversarial trials? Freedom to do anything unless it’s specifically illegal rather than not being allowed to do anything unless the government specifically makes it legal………..?!

          And as for: “- and when it comes to “Why the
          EU?” the answer is, the desire for peace that was the founding force and
          a much bigger reason for pursuing its better functioning than pathetic
          selfish Little Englander ideas that have more in common with Bundy/Palin
          thinking than our historic humanitarian drive.”

          This would be a reference to the way the EU provoked the peaceful breakup of Yugoslavia? Or the bloodless coup in the Ukraine? Or the victimless destruction of Libya?!

    • T Gould

      The idea that the analogy breaks down because the numbers don’t work is ridiculous. It’s about culture and statehood. There are 80 million in Germany and about 1.4 million in Estonia and they are members of the same union. There are also federal states in the european union. I suppose anything goes when dismissing eurosceptics, however.

      • smileoftdecade

        I refer you to the answer below.

  • Pioneer

    Obama and his minions are totalitarians.

  • MrBishi

    I would like to formally nominate this article for a comedy award.
    “America would never join anything like the EU.”
    Someone should tell Matt what the acronym USA stands for.

    • Village Idiot

      I expected this reply from someone. The states of the USA were at one point developing along separate paths but decided they had much more in common than things that separated them. I would guess that some of the factors were: a land mass, a common spirit (a pioneering one I suppose), language (from some point in the 1800’s?? until Spanish became a popular second language, at any rate). They key point is they -decided- to. When did we ‘decide’ to join what we have now, really? Be honest and reasonable in your answer.

      With Europe, I feel we have more that separates us than we have in common.

      What’s the right size for a ‘nation’ to be anyway? A county? Many in Kernow – Cornwall – would like to separate. The Basques/Catalans? Or are you after one world government really, Mr Bishi?

      For me, a unit of one Britain seems about right, with our common land mass, language (mostly), history and, all things considered, a pretty similar culture and outlook.

      • MrBishi

        You are entitled to your views.

        • Mary Ann

          He’s allowed to be wrong. Get to know more Europeans, we are very similar, but then the British are predominately German, Celtic, and French. with a few other European tribes mixed in.

      • UKSteve

        You are responding to a world -class tr0ll, who write the most incredible (but hilarious) rubbish!

    • Mr B J Mann

      Someone should tell Mr Bishi what the acronym FRG (or BRD) stands for.

      • MrBishi

        You’re confusing me with someone who gives …

        • Mr B J Mann

          Sound advice on the EU?

          Clearly not!

          I’ve Outed you as a typical EU supporting idiot.

          And you’ve just confirmed it!

          • MrBishi

            Halfwit.
            If you had one more brain cell you would have to be watered.

          • Mr B J Mann

            Thank you for yet again summarising the depth and breadth of the pro EU argument.

          • MrBishi

            Someone should tell you what FO stands for.

          • Mr B J Mann

            Hahahahaha!!!!!!!!

            You work for the Foreign Office!!!

            Should have known!!!!!!

  • John Carins

    As their previous colonial masters,the Americans are only interested in our final subjugation. Moreover, it was fine for them to seek independence but not for the British to at least take back what we have given away.

    • rtj1211

      The Americans don’t believe in the American Bill of Rights and the American Constitution for anyone but Americans……it’s a debate they should have in the Oxford Union, as there simply aren’t enough English/British students in America to put the case properly at Harvard, Yale or Cornell…..

    • Sanctimony

      Remember that the miscegenated Americans had vital French support when they won the War of Independence against us… they are as thick as thieves…

      • John Carins

        Absolutely. The revolutionary ideas were then imported back to France and led to the rise of Napoleon – a man who gave Britain a lot of grief. The French are often to be found behind many a calamity..

  • rtj1211

    Shame on you Mr Ridley: you are implying that Americans are hypocrites!

    I fear you will have the CIA ‘showing an interest in you’ if you go on like this.

    They won’t care if it’s just once or twice.

    But if you ever got serious, your house would be under surveillance, you’d have cars following you around, your mobile will be hacked and the spooks will be listening in on every call, cutting you off if you ever say anything non-PC, especially if it’s about America or Israel…….

  • Tickertapeguy

    John Kerry is Washington D.C.
    Please do not connect the parasites of that horrible city with the rest of America.

  • Zoe Butcher

    I don’t know. I don’t think that’s entirely true. I could predict a day when Canada/Mexico/U.S. would found some type of thing like the E.U. eventually.

    • Pacificweather

      No need to predict: NAFTA was formed in 1994 with its own Commission and bureaucracy like the EU. Its the Spectator; you cannot expect accurate journalism.

      • WFB56

        Why do you continue to repeat the same inane comment? If the EU were a trade arrangement like NAFTA and not a wannabe federal state, everyone would be all for it; but that’s neither reality nor the choice.

        • Pacificweather

          If you think my comment is a repetition then you must have read the comment in which I explain why it is the same. If you have not done so then look at my recent posts. The federal state controls NAFTA already it is not a wannabe.

        • Mary Ann

          If we joined the EU properly not only would we be ruling the place in a few years they would all be speaking English within a few generations, but no, the leavers lack the spirit that made the British Empire great, backwards rather than forwards.

          • WFB56

            Ridiculous, obviously you’ve no experience in dealing with the EU. The Germans, French and even the Dutch regularly run circles around the UK. That’s never going to change.

          • Mary Ann

            Are you saying that they are cleverer than us, well I might agree about the Dutch, All the Dutch people I know seem to speak four or five languages. But you really can’t expect the other EU countries to pay too much attention with us when we stand on the sidelines, our own fault.

          • WFB56

            Speaking multiple languages doesn’t mean much in and of itself. You can speak 5 languages and have nothing useful to say in any of them.

            I am not saying they are more clever than we are; they’re not. They do have fundamentally different history’s, cultures, traditions, legal systems and a broadly different world view – one which is often feckless – the UK is the odd man out and no amount of “re-education” is going to change that.

          • Mary Ann

            I don’t find that we are very different.

          • WFB56

            That means that you’re not paying attention.

            For example, the Napoleonic code versus common law. Pretty fundamental differences.

          • WFB56

            Nonsense. The French, Germans and even the Dutch run circles around the UK. Being consistently on the wrong end of 27 to 1 votes, it is a grotesque lie that we have any influence on anyone in the EU.

    • WFB56

      Ridiculous. The US is never going to cede control of any aspect of governance to a pooled group of unelected foreigners.

      • goodsoldier

        Obama would if they would only keep him as a permanent president.

        • Mary Ann

          Ha Ha!

  • Pacificweather

    Yet, strangely, they are members NAFTA and their currency is used other countries throughout the world. Spectator “journalists’ must be being trained by the Telegraph.

    “In 1994, the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) came into effect, creating one of the world’s largest free trade zones and laying the foundations for strong economic growth and rising prosperity for Canada, the United States, and Mexico. Since then, NAFTA has demonstrated how free trade increases wealth and competitiveness, delivering real benefits to families, farmers, workers, manufacturers, and consumers.”

    Naturally, it has its own Commission and bureaucracy just like the EU.

    “A number of NAFTA institutions work to ensure smooth implementation and day-to-day oversight of the Agreement’s provisions.

    Free Trade Commission
    Made up of ministerial representatives from the NAFTA partners.

    Supervises the implementation and further elaboration of the Agreement and helps resolve disputes arising from its interpretation.

    Oversees the work of the NAFTA committees, working groups, and other subsidiary bodies.

    NAFTA Coordinators
    Senior trade department officials designated by each country.

    Responsible for the day-to-day management of NAFTA implementation.

    NAFTA Working Groups and Committees
    Over 30 working groups and committees have been established to facilitate trade and investment and to ensure the effective implementation and administration of NAFTA.

    Key areas of work include trade in goods, rules of origin, customs, agricultural trade and subsidies, standards, government procurement, investment and services, cross-border movement of business people, and alternative dispute resolution.

    NAFTA Secretariat
    Made up of a “national section” from each member country.

    Responsible for administering the dispute settlement provisions of the Agreement and for administering dispute resolution processes under Chapter 14, Chapter 19 and Chapter 20. Also has certain responsibilities related to the Chapter 11 dispute settlement provisions concerning investment.

    Maintains a court-like registry relating to panel, committee, and tribunal proceedings.

    Maintains a tri-national website containing up-to-date information on past and current disputes.

    Commission for Labor Cooperation
    Created to promote cooperation on labor matters among NAFTA members and the effective enforcement of domestic labor law.

    Consists of a Council of Ministers (comprising the labor ministers from each country) and a Secretariat, which provides administrative, technical, and operational support to the Council and implements an annual work program. Departments responsible for labor in each of the three countries serve as domestic implementation points.

    Commission for Environmental Cooperation
    Established to further cooperation among NAFTA partners in implementing the environmental side accord to NAFTA and to address environmental issues of continental concern, with particular attention to the environmental challenges and opportunities presented by continent-wide free trade.

    Consists of a Council (comprising the environment ministers from each country), a Joint Public Advisory Committee (a 15-member, independent volunteer body that provides advice and public input to Council on any matter within the scope of the environmental accord), and a Secretariat (which provides administrative, technical, and operational support).”

    • WFB56

      A ridiculous comparison as NAFTA is a free trade zone and not a federation. There is no NAFTA court that rules on immigration nor is there any suggestion of a common foreign policy or a NAFTA army.

      You are the winner of the most clueless comment of the day.

      • Pacificweather

        Asked and answered.

      • Nephthys

        Nor a presidency, nor a common external tariff, nor a legislature, nor a civil service.

        NAFTA is a Free Trade Agreement made manifest by treaty. The EU is a supranational state made manifest by law. NAFTA doesn’t make laws, the EU does, and what’s more, its law is supreme over all the territories in which it is sovereign.

        It’s a risible comparison.

  • John M

    America is ALREADY a union of 51 states, and just about the only thing they all agree on is that they all hate Washington!

    • For Whom the Troll Bells

      Are there 51 States?

      • Mary Ann

        The 51st state doesn’t get to vote in their elections, that’s us, unlike the EU where we do get to vote.

        • For Whom the Troll Bells

          Given the likely Presidential candidates for both the Democrat and Republican Parties, is not having a vote in the US elections something to be regretted?

  • Dr Strangelove

    What utter nonsense. The United States of America is a federal. Union just as the EU

    • The Reincarnated Sausage

      With a common language, aspirations and culture.

      • Dr Strangelove

        You mean the common heritage of ex African Slaves, Native Americans, Hispanics and North European immigrants?

        • Mary Ann

          Bit like us with our German, Danish, French background. Hang on a moment, that makes us more similar than the Americans. And nearly all Europeans learn English as a second language these days, even the younger shop assistants speak English.

      • Mary Ann

        If you talked to other Europeans you would realise that we have far more in common than you think we have, and a pleasantly large number of them speak English.

  • For Whom the Troll Bells

    What is the 51st State? For John M below.

  • Sean Raymond

    A word of warning – Leon Wolfeson is a troll. I urge the moderators of this forum to do something – a warning perhaps. I am receiving copious replies to posts I made months ago as he is clearly trolling my comments history and making very weird, nonsensical replies. He is even making up things I have said. Strange indeed.

    • Mary Ann

      You mean he’s a leftie, and you can’t stand people disagreeing with you, personally I find his comments a refreshing change.

    • http://www.lemonparty.org/ Cap’n Careless

      Good grief. Just install that Disqus comment blocker thingy and then your delicate eyes will never again be indecently assaulted by his vile communistic harangues.

      • Sean Raymond

        Delicate eyes? You serious pal? On what basis are you judging my eyes to be delicate? I am receiving dozens of emails with this chaps replies, all distortions of what I have said – I am merely pointing out this insanity – and asked the moderators to deal with it – saves me the inconvenience and others too. I am not crying. As for the Disqus comment blocker thingy – never heard of it – not a regular contributor – and clearly you ain’t so sure about it either hence using the term ‘thingy’. Give me a link and I’ll install it. Regards.

  • Conway

    So the US Secretary of State, John Kerry, thinks his country has a ‘profound interest… in a very strong United Kingdom staying in a strong EU’,” Which just shows his total ignorance of what the EU is. In the EU we cannot ever be strong. In order to be strong and self governing we have to leave.

    • goodsoldier

      You are right, he knows nothing about the EU except that it is a left-wing construct–that’s all he needs to know. The Obama administration is much like the EU, undemocratic, propagandist, central control oriented, aims for a huge welfare state, vast Green policies permanently in place to create an permanent income flow to the government, etc. The sad fact is that half the population in the U.S. and Britain are getting used to this and don’t know any better. Good little pioneers.

      • Mary Ann

        ‘Hugh welfare state,’ you mean health care for those who cannot earn large salaries. And you are in the position where you can get good health care just by being ill and not having to wonder if you can afford the treatment. You don’t know how lucky you are.

    • Mary Ann

      In order to be strong we need to be in the EU, properly in the EU, not sitting on the side lines with no say in what happens in Europe.

  • WFB56

    Well written and it should be required reading for every US politician who presumes to interfere in our referendum.

  • Jackthesmilingblack

    “I would never join a club that would accept me as a member.”

    • Hamburger

      Are you sure that any would?

  • Oddsbods

    The USA wants Britain in the EU as its “eyes and ears” to what is going on inside of the EU and to be able to exert influence in a way that will benefit the USA, nothing else.

  • Terence Hale

    “America would never join anything like the EU. Yet they urge us to stay”. Such is an ambivalent statement. The EU tries to be like America with a single currency, a federal based government the only problem is, its not working, and cannot work with 28 bosses.

  • The Reincarnated Sausage

    The America’s have been attempting to create a similar trading block of their own for decades, and a common N American currency, the Amero. The plan was to to create a trading block of Canada, Mexico and the USA trading under a common currency and eventually assimilate the central and south American nations into the same.

    So the whole premise of this article is rubbish, frankly

    • goodsoldier

      Trade arrangements, possibly, but not political union and erasure of the U.S.A. as a new country under another flag.

      • JimBlue

        No I think that the Republicans would be very keen on the erasure of the other two and a bigger country under the Stars and Stripes.

    • Mary Ann

      There will be the American block, the European block, and the Asian block.

      • Hamburger

        Looking from here it seems that we have 28 European blocks at the moment.

    • Mr B J Mann

      So they’ve been “trying”.

      Which sounds like they’ve succeeded in failing!

      I your point is?

  • Andrew Finn

    The US always says that it’s in ‘their’ interests to have the UK in the European Union. They never say that it’s in the UK’s interests.

    I bet the US are putting pressure on Cameron, like they usually do when we have a weak Prime Minister. I think Thatcher’s the only PM we have had since we joined who wouldn’t have let them walk all over her.

    It’s not in our national interests to stay. I’m pro-American, but this current administration is a joke.

    • goodsoldier

      Only the Obama administration, a Clinton or Sanders administration, would want Britain to stay in the EU.

      • Andrew Finn

        Yes the Democrats love things like this.

        Under a Republican President, I have no doubt that they would encourage us to leave. The bureaucracy and many levels of government would make them sick.

        • trobrianders

          Democrats love things like this because it’s communism by the back door. They know full well their citizens would never elect a left wing government by choice.

          • JimBlue

            Clearly you have no understanding of what communism actually is, the differences it has from socialism or the idea that through the whole can come a greater good. Americans all think the UK NHS is a communist institution but the British (who must all clearly be communists) are exceptionally proud of it.

        • big

          ..Oh yes they’d love us to leave! so they could own us like a prison b*tch.

        • Mary Ann

          I doubt it, we are the key for American access into the EU.

    • big

      I wouldn’t be to sure about Thatcher,after all she campaigned to take the UK into Europe,and she absolutely loved Amerika.,ka,ka,ka

      • Mr B J Mann

        And then when she saw what it led to regretted it!

  • trobrianders

    The EU is communism by the back door.

    ”The most puzzling development in politics during the last decade is the apparent determination of Western European leaders to re-create the Soviet Union in Western Europe.”
    Mikhail Gorbachev

    • Mary Ann

      Hardly, we have democracies.

      • trobrianders

        Democracies with leftist indoctrination spreading like cancer

        • big

          Actually we have post democratic states with neoliberal doctrine and ideology,democracy really doesn’t exist in the current system.We decided to to follow market based solution’s a long time ago,and now we have a system of global governance via numerous opeque international organisations,all of which are beyond true democratic control.

          • trobrianders

            You must think very highly of people if you believe that. Nothing is beyond democratic control lest the people forswear it

          • JimBlue

            Which is why the only candidates in the US elections are very rich people funded by very rich companies. Politics in the US is practised by the wealthy, controlled by the wealthy and funded by the wealthy. People might vote but the lack of choice of candidates who are from outside the wealthy elite means that the best they can do is democratically elect a rich president.

          • trobrianders

            That’s right, people have no free will. They are just stupid peasants whose only hope lies in an enlightened leftist vanguard to make decisions for them. You are a hideous creature of the Left whose days are numbered.

          • Chimp

            Our free will was a problem but they’ll erase that with our new-found stupidity. If some emerging country voted for a leader who then swiftly created another more powerful, yet untouchable leader above him we’d all be shocked and banging on about democracy and freedom but the same people are actively encouraging us to join something which has done exactly that. If we vote IN we deserve everything we get for being so stupid.

          • JimBlue

            You may regard people as stupid or lacking freewill, I don’t. Pragmatism says that were the choice is poor, you choose the best of a bad bunch. I certainly think that is what the Americans do. Sometimes they are even fortunate to get a strong political leader (Roosevelt or John Kennedy) or one who has a strong and politically astute cabinet who can guide and assist (Ronald Reagan). But at the end of the day it is a very limited choice and small pools of talent unfortunately lead to major political issues (ask the Royal houses of Europe).
            Whether I am on the left or right of political though is irrelevant,. I no more see freedom and economic success coming from the left wing of politics than I do from the conservative and religious right. When I make judgments I try and think through all the sides of the argument to identify weaknesses and strengths and to decide which is the approach I should support. Those with blinkered views and who see the world in terms of black and white worry me since they cannot see the weaknesses of their position and are therefore more likely to fail.

          • trobrianders

            You believe people have no power. Why? Of course they have power. You are clearly of the Left if you believe people have no power. It’s a leftist pretext to impose socialism on them.

          • JimBlue

            Your really need to get out more. I believe people should be given more power and, importantly, the skills to use it. I am fed up of the media attempting to lead the majority like sheep down a specific route. I believe that all people should have the right, if they choose, to stand for election without having to have a budget the size of a small countries GDP in order to do so. I also think that people need to exercise their power more effectively but to do that they need to stop navel gazing and start to think critically about what they are told and to determine what is or isn’t true. I bet you still think there are more black men in jail than in college.

          • BrickinaWall

            Which is why the only candidates in the UK elections are very rich
            people funded by very rich companies. Politics in the UK is practised
            by the wealthy, controlled by the wealthy and funded by the wealthy.
            People might vote but the lack of choice of candidates who are from
            outside the wealthy elite means that the best they can do is
            democratically elect a rich prime minister.

          • JimBlue

            Remind me again, how rich is Jeremy Corbyn and which companies funded his campaign? In addition the UK does not allow SuperPacs like the American legal system has for candidates in the US nor does the UK allow candidates to spend vast sums on advertising in order to undermine the credibility of their opponents. I have serious reservations about British democracy but if I was American I would have much greater concerns about the situation there.

          • BrickinaWall

            I agree that the American version is more visibly broken. However Labour recieves millions from donors all of whom see those funds as an investment. Thankfully political advertising is not of the American type, in terms of mud-slinging, but the mechanisms are broadly similar in how they operate. There may not be direct advertising as in the US but the media here does a wonderful job of undermining political opponents, and more disgustingly does it under the guise of journalism.

            Besides, Corbyn stands no chance of being prime minister with his current thinking. If he ever sits in the big chair we will once again see how quickly a politician can change his spots.

          • Mr B J Mann

            “nor does the UK allow candidates to spend vast sums on advertising in order to undermine the credibility of their opponents.”

            But they seem to have been spending vast sums on campaignin against Farage!

            And the media have been spending vast sums in order to undermine his credibility!!!

          • BrickinaWall

            The people always have have the governance they want and deserve.

      • Tom Cullem

        Really? You should take a look at the article called “Britain’s Broken Democracy” on politico.eu of earlier this week.

        Most of those “democracies” are now nothing more than money laundering operations for global corporatists. Just wait till TTIP goes through, and grass roots control over local environmental, health, and labour regulations are destroyed if they interfere with profits.

    • Muireach MacGilleChaluim

      And here I was thinking it was the Fourth Reich. D’oh!

      • http://www.lemonparty.org/ Cap’n Careless

        It’s both. As any self-respecting Spectator commenter will tell you, fascists are actually left-wingers.

        • trobrianders

          I’m British born non white and growing up in the 70s knew bigotry resided on the Right. These days of course bigotry finds its natural home on the Left.

          • BrickinaWall

            The world stop functioning in such simple terms as “Left” and “Right” ages ago. It’s all shades of grey and the same people are both.

  • MahmudH

    America has treated Britain as a vassal for the past 70 years. Why complain now?

    • Tom Cullem

      America nearly singlehandedly supports NATO, and the only two countries in NATO with anything resembling a real defence force are Britain and Turkey. Turkey is in NATO, remember?

      And during that 70 years, America’s Lend Lease Act kept Britain alive to fight on and hold on against the Third Reich when the rest of Europe was caving in to Hitler’s jackboots.

      A bit of respect for history might be in order.

      • MahmudH

        Indeed, the USA protected Britain 70 years ago. Since then they have required Britain to toe the line and do what its told. That’s not the relationship between allies, but between a hegemonic power and its protectorate.

      • JimBlue

        Have you ever looked at the proper title for the Lend Lease Act? It was formally called “An Act to Promote the Defense of the United States” sets the tone really doesn’t it. It was a good act and let’s be clear the UK was not the only beneficiary as China and Russia also benefited from the consequences of the Act.
        Britain had already actually survived the initial threat from Germany through the Battle of Britain which occurred in 1940. Lend Lease allowed it to actually start the fight back.
        Britain was one of the only recipients of aid to actually repay the American Govt both in cash (final repayment made in December 2006) and in technology with the Manahattan project being a massive beneficiary of the work of British scientists as well as the provision of radar, jet engines and sonar amongst many others.

      • BrickinaWall

        America single-handedly is NATO, a war-mongering organisation designed to keep its arms factories in business. The other members are puppets, most of whom joined out of fear (whether real or imaginary is debatable- just see how easy is has been over the past couple of years to stir up a new cold war, where none exists).

        If it wasn’t for the yanks’ meddling in the middle east and eastern Europe there would be absolutely no reason for Nato to continue exisiting.

        History is a matter of perception and bias.

  • Mary Ann

    The USA and Europe together can keep the rest of the world in check, and we speak the same language.

    • Hamburger

      German?

      • Mary Ann

        I have a German friend who describes English as a German dialect, personally I think it is more French, although the grammar is more German than French.

        • Hamburger

          I fear he was teasing you. English is a hybrid language with some German words. I don’t see many similarities with our grammar, but then I am no expert.

          • Mary Ann

            I don’t speak very much German at all, but my French is fairly good, and the further you go with French the easier it becomes because so many words are the same, words ending in tion ible able ment…….

    • Tom Cullem

      I beg your pardon? The EU is essentially a Franco-German power project that Germany more or less appropriated, and the last time I checked, they spoke French in Paris and German in Berlin, and English in Washington, DC.

      And regardless of what language they do or don’t speak, as far as keeping the world in check, Mr Putin has run rings around both entities – and he speaks Russian.

      • Mary Ann

        And if we had wholeheartedly joined it when we had the chance we would now be running it instead. You see, I have more faith in Britain than all you outers.

        • UKSteve

          More ridiculous and insupportable rubbish.

        • BrickinaWall

          Correct. By not cutting the leash that leads to Washington, Britain is neither here nor there.

        • disqus_9aoJ6FPhVl

          France and Germany did not want us to join, originally. Make of that what you will

          • Chimp

            Absolutely. Plus no-one in their right mind would vote to join in any sort of group led by a country that tried to gain a dictatorship just 30 years before. Solution, wait 40 years. Peace may be the trap.

  • Hamburger

    ‘profound interest… in a very strong United Kingdom staying in a strong EU’ The EU does not seem to be very strong. Wishful thinking from Mr Kerry.

    • Mary Ann

      It will be weaker outside the EU, especially if leaving the EU leads to the breakup of the UK. It’s just the excuse the SNP are looking for to have another referendum.

      • Hamburger

        It was the strong EU which caused a raised eyebrow. It is anything but.

      • Tom Cullem

        Sturgeon trumpets that business about Scotland leaving every day at dawn. The price of their biggest asset is plunging, the EU itself is likely to turn into something more like tiered levels of membership, and it takes five years to process membership. Meanwhile, the Scots enjoy all that money that flows north from Westminster.
        The EU of a few years ago might have looked appealing before the migrant crisis, Greece, the failures of the Eurozone, all uncovered the cracks.
        The Scots can also consider if they’re willing to be sold to Turkey by Merkel as she tries to cover up the mess she made of the migrant crisis, and foot the bill for that 3bn “down payment” to Turkey as it plays both ends against the middle.
        I wouldn’t be too certain at this point that the Scots would be going anywhere if a Brexit occurs, which I doubt.

    • Mary Ann

      Only because the press barons think they have something to gain by Britain leaving, I wonder what it is?

  • WalterSEllis

    America has a population of 325 million and has the biggest economy in the world. The comparison is meaningless.

    • Chimp

      But the EU as a single country (flag, national anthem, currency are already in place for that) would have the biggest economy in the world and a population of almost double. The comparison isn’t meaningless when you wonder why America would encourage the loss of it’s Superpower status to the EU which is effectively run by a country it was fighting a war on less than 100 years ago. That’s not meaningless at all, that says heaps,

  • trobrianders

    Mistaking America for global capital is something idiot metropolitans do. Trump supporters are teaching you all a lesson.

  • John Andrews

    The EU Capital is in Belgium. Which small badly run country is best suited to being Capital of the American Union?

    • trobrianders

      PR

    • JimBlue

      Since when? The EU parliament meets there but it also meets in Strasbourg. Elements of the EU bureaucracy work there but they also work in lots of other countries across Europe. There is no “EU capital”

      • John Andrews

        Since 1 November 1993.

        • JimBlue

          From a Eurosceptic web site http://www.euro-sceptic.org/brussels-the-unofficial-capital-of-the-eu.html. There is no official EU capital. Just because you view something as a capital does not make it so.

          • John Andrews

            Britain is constitutional democracy without a written constitution. As the link you provide states in the first paragraph ‘Brussels is de facto considered the capital of the EU because it is home to many important European institutions including the European Commission, the Council of the European Union and the European Parliament’. It is, in other words, the city from which we are governed.

          • JimBlue

            First off the meaning of de facto is as follows:
            existing or holding a specified position in fact but not necessarily by legal right.
            Therefore, Brussels cannot claim to be the capital because it has no legal right to do so. The Eurosceptic site acknowledges that there is no “official” capital of the EU and since the EU is not a state but conglomeration of states it is difficult to see how it can be considered a capital, not least as the head of the EU moves every six months from one member state to another.

          • John Andrews

            de facto often trumps de jure

          • Mr B J Mann

            Just like Berlin couldn’t “claim” to be the capital of Europe in the early 40s because it had no legal right to.

            There was no “official” capital of Europe in the 40s and since Europe was not a state but conglomeration of states it is difficult to see how it could be considered a capital.

            It was “only” the de facto capital.

            Thanks for clearing that up for us!

    • http://www.lemonparty.org/ Cap’n Obvious

      Soviet Canuckistan.

      • EasyStreet

        Good choice, like Belgium consisting of two irreconcilable linguistic blocs.

    • Chimp

      The EU have placed temporary stalls in Belgium and France(just) to sell their us their vision as having it in Germany would be too obvious what was going on, yet it’s pretty clear who runs the show. It’ll go back to it’s natural home of Berlin soon once we surrender when they can play our EU national anthem ‘Ode To Joy’ (German song popular in 1941). We’re Little Red Riding Hoods (German author) about to get in bed with the wolf. Short short memories.

      • mikewaller

        If you seriously think that Germany now poses the biggest threat to our domestic security I would suggest the immediate purchase of “Current Affairs for Dummies”.

        • Mr B J Mann

          Has the new edition covering Cologne been released yet?!

    • BrickinaWall

      Pick a town in bankrupt California, or Detroit.

  • bobbyalpy

    Obama may want Britain in The EU but most Americans do not.We are much more comfortable with English speaking people being entirely free from foreign influence.Most Americans loath the lowly europeans and would hate to see any English speaking people subordinate to mere euros.

  • oldfashionedfellow

    1) The American elite hate America; its history, culture, laws, and distinctiveness. They’d sell their own country down the river as fast as they’re advocating for you to do the same with the UK.

    2) The difference between the two countries is that the American people themselves abhor the idea of joining an AU. By contrast, most Britons have shown strong support for remaining in the EU, by virtue of their continued support for pro-EU parties. Polls to the contrary are all well and good, but it’s only votes that matter.

  • mikewaller

    Is this guy Delingpole’s long-lost – and entirely unlooked for – twin? Like the aforementioned, he gets absolutely everything wrong, from running banks, through gobal warming to this nonsense. Because the kind of greedy capitalists he venerates have sold the ordinary Joe – both in Europe and in North America – down the river by “exporting” manufacturing technologies to low cost economies, those ordinary Joe’s are increasingly finding themselves sans jobs and/or a decent standard of living. The only chance of some kind of bulwark against this is to be within a trade bloc in which living standards are significantly higher than the global average. If, instead, a second division player like the UK were to go it alone, the outcome would be disastrous. Without a friend in the world, we’d find ourselves stuffed by all and sundry. Please wake up, fantasists, this is 2016 not 1866!

    • Chimp

      Thought we’d just pulled out all the stops to befriend China when the leader was here, and the US is hardly our enemy so what makes you think the top 2 economies aren’t our friends. Do their actions of shutting down what the UK wants make you think the EU are our friends? We’re told we’d have a bigger world voice staying in the EU but actually THEY’D have a bigger voice, we’d be in a gang of nearly 30 trying to be heard. Joining something because we’re scared of not being in it is not a good reason especially when we’ve prospered because of keeping one foot OUT of the EU, a bit like joining a gang of bullies at school so they don’t hurt you.

      • BrickinaWall

        By keeping one foot out, Britain finds itself with a diminished role in the EU. Can’t have it both ways; not fully committing to the EU, but expecting to dominate proceedings.

      • mikewaller

        Think steel! The first whiff of American steel workers starting to suffer because their inefficient industry could not compete on world markets, and dear old “freetrader” Geo. W Bush whacked up protective tariffs. Now the Chinese steel industry which has been ludicrously over-expanded is in trouble as their domestic economy starts to cool. What happens? Chinese steel dumping all over the world! Even the EU struggles to find effective counter-measures so do you seriously think that “GB, Sole-Trader” would be anything more than an inconsequential cork in a storm? Do wake up, leave dreamland and face the world as it is.

    • Mr B J Mann

      The US exported jobs to the third world.

      The EU is importing workers from the third world.

      And?!

  • Muireach MacGilleChaluim

    The early history of the United States parallels that of the EU in some ways – the USA – like the EU – began as a loose association of individual states but ended up falling victim to a process of creeping federalisation which saw power shifting away from the states and towards the Federal government. This of course included the imposition of a single currency (the US dollar)….

    • BrickinaWall

      …and led to the creation of the greatest empire the world has yet seen. Not a bad result.

      • Chimp

        Who are advising us to go down a route that is on the verge of creating a larger superpower than them. Is that not weird? And one with Germany at the helm.

        • BrickinaWall

          Nothing weird about it. The US realises that it’s short stint as the world’s only superpower is coming to an end. With the resurgence of Russia, the rapid rise of China and the inevitable rise of India we are moving into a multi-polar world.

          The EU can be part of this group, the UK alone not. Neither can the French, Germans et al. Take the sanctions against Russia over Ukraine; as a bloc the EU sanctions carry a great deal more weight than had only the UK and maybe a couple more individual countries applied the same sanctions. A united Europe is far more powerful than just the sum of its parts.

          The US wants a friendly superpower; one they do not fear militarily and which they can somewhat influence. Germany leads this group quite simply because they are the most successful member of the group and make the largest contributions to its existance. You seem to imply that Germany is not a suitable leader for this group, I assume, due to their history of military adventurism. However the history of the British (French, Spanish, etc) empires is no less bloody. It’s the same reason that the UK continues to support Turkey, an empire and later a nation that was also the enemy during both world wars. This does not preclude the Germans from dominating the EU. The UK has misssed being a leading force in the EU due to its continuing being a proxy for the US.

          • Chimp

            Yeah I’m not blaming Germany as such, and I absolutely know of Britains bloody very close attempt at world domination. The thing is we’ve never once been mention as any sort of superpower by us or america. We hear about Russia, possibly India, and Americans know of the next one to challenge as China. But why is the possible EU one never mentioned. Do average Americans even know that some of their descendant countries and one ex enemy may soon be a joint force bigger than them, as I’m sure they’d be surprised. The government don’t seem worried, so I guess they have plans for us, or vice versa! Not sure if I’m comfortable with the world slowly moving into a few large superpowers though, all with their fingers on a trigger.

          • BrickinaWall

            As i said the US as a state and as a peoples don’t have anything to fear from such a european superpower. There is far more that binds us than divides us.

            Ultimately those large superpowers will occur because of the huge populations of India and China. In order to be able to fight for a share in a world where some competitors have armies of billions of people is it not better to be part of an army of half a billion; as opposed to part of an army of 60 million?

          • Mr B J Mann

            So you’re sayin we should leave the EU and join the US or NATO!

          • Mr B J Mann

            So you’re saying that just like Turkey is prepared to risk starting WW3 by fomenting civil war in Syria, Germany might be prepared to risk starting WW3 by fomenting civil war in, ooooh, I don’t know, Yugoslavia?

            Oh, wait a minute!!!

          • BrickinaWall

            Sorry, Mr Mann, I don’t get your point.

          • Mr B J Mann

            No need to apologise:

            I understand.

  • JimBlue

    I read this article and realised just how daft the author is. The USA is the EU of the Americas. Fifty independent states joined it over a period of 200 years. They accepted the need for a federal government, a common currency, common legal principles and supreme court. That is what the USA is and the languages spoken within America are also mixed with Spanish and English being the predominant ones, but Greek, Italian, Polish, Russian and others also commonly spoken. English is simply the common glue for the Americans.
    If this author really wants to compare apples with applies then if America joins the American Union that the UK should call for the Council of Europe to become a common political and economic entity.

    • EasyStreet

      The USA is not the “EU of the Americas”. The American states were all in their (relative) infancy at the time of the Union, with a similar cultural outlook to each other, and sharing a vast continental landmass with a range of hostile peoples gave a strong incentive to federalise so that defence would only by needed around the periphery, Civil War notwithstanding.

      By contrast each European state has a (relatively) long and storied history, resulting in the existence of a range of cultures and differing legal traditions. There may well be a security-based rationale for federalisation of the Continental states, but that does not apply to the UK. In any case, NATO has done a good-enough job for 60 years without any loss of sovereignty.

      I may be reading your post wrong (your second paragraph seems at odds with the first) but I don’t think you can liken the US to the EU at all.

      • BrickinaWall

        So you don’t want to be under the yoke of Brussels and prefer the yoke of Washington?

      • JimBlue

        The United States has grown by expansion through the absorption of new states for a period of over 100 years (first states joined in 1787 and the last two states in 1959. The states shares some common enemies (as did the EU at inception) but were not the same culturally or linguistically (French, Spanish and English cultures flourished in the majority of states and German and other cultures elsewhere).
        The EU was created as a mechanism for diffusing the causes of the wars that had plagued continental Europe for centuries.
        My issue with the article is that the author’s portrayal of the EU is not consistent with the economic status of the US. Hence my suggestion that the better comparison would be for the UK to join a political bloc based on the members of the Council of Europe since that would be more comparable with the US situation of joining with the other states of the Americas. Both Blocs would have a large continental superpower who would dominate such a bloc both militarily and with control of vast amounts of resources.

  • Sanctimony

    America thinks only of itself… there is zilch altruism in their dealings with the rest of the world… remember their descriptions of the French as cheese-eating surrender monkeys when we supported the USA in the recent Gulf conflicts etc…

    Seems their loyalty to us has waned, along with their taste buds…

    • BrickinaWall

      Hmmm, I wonder if they learnt that from the British Empire.

    • Patrick Harris

      Yes, because the British are always altruistic in everything they do Sanctimony.

    • lojolondon

      No, there is a lot of overlap between USA and UK, just Obummer hates Britain. This will change whoever takes over, especially if Trump takes over.

    • Chimp

      It’s not thinking though, it’s being mislead. Germany is deemed to be a gentle country with no weapons, France is now equated with the peace sign and the UK are their friends right? Well there’s a bigger superpower in the wings and, surprise it’s all your old friends! Since the public would be alarmed at that and at an America never stopping the illegal transfer of powers above public’s reach, it must be a plan to finally take Russia and China. Certainly the way in which the U.S was mashed into a country is now funnily enough, being used on us. Force first then bleat democracy. The idea of USA being free is a lie if you have to be a Christian to run the country, and then get no choice with only a Christian to choose from.

  • Patrick Roy

    Exactly. Their probably afraid of a re-united Commonwealth, so hope we drown with the rest of the (In)Continent… And who cares what Obama or John Kerry says? These clowns could not even make it to the Charlie Hebdo parade.

    • JimBlue

      A re-united Commonwealth, best joke I have seen all week. There is no chance of a reunited Commonwealth. In fact any Commonwealth country with assets worth having is now owned by China because China doesn’t demand that they apply human rights, give the aid sent to the people and are happy to hand over back handers to the corrupt rulers of most Commonwealth nations.

      • Patrick Roy

        Some of the Commonwealth countries are indeed lost… but certainly not all. The English speaking democracies are natural partners. More can be done here than with the EU.

  • Cobbett

    The EU is the prototype globalist organisation…as long as the US is not challenged by it, they’re more than happy to pull it’s strings.

  • Chimp

    The future of the “democratic” EU is clear in the fact of the Lisbon Treaty which gave the EU more powers was found to be unpopular, so they changed the name and applied it anyway. That’s your future democracy at work kiddies, pretend to want your opinion but then just apply it anyway. Democracy is a lie. We’re being pulled in for peace and love and holding hands and once they’ve got us they close the door. Thought America hated unelected dictators, yet this has got this far without a whimper. The EU court system means there are people that can work above the law (unlike UK), and the EU Right to be Forgotten(or censored) means they are ensuring that they have the tools in place so that they will never been shown in a bad light. We’ve walked straight in to a dictatorship started by the lure of peace after a failed dictatorship attempt and made to believe it’s what we asked for, tricked, and future generations will never know the truth. Very scary times.

    • JimBlue

      And who voted to allow the EU to introduce the Lisbon treaty? That’s right the individual parliaments of each member state and in some countries the actual voting public had the chance to vote against it and didn’t.
      Before you mention Ireland, let’s remember that it was the Irish Govt that decided to have a second vote not the EU.
      Whilst EU democracy is weak and watered down, it is still a democratic body, it has an elected Parliament (ask Nigel Farage), it has a Commission whose members are appointed by elected officials in each member state and last but not least it has a Council of Ministers each of whom is an elected official in the relevant member state. The EU is democratic and acts on the wishes of the majority of the states. Therefore its failings and problems are a direct consequence of the idiots that we vote in to power in our own countries.

      • Chimp

        Voting for one thing and then over the course of 40 years having that morph into something we never once got a chance to vote on is not democracy. It’s bait & switch. Promising to give a vote on giving away powers, then changing the name and putting it through anyway is not democracy. That’s a release of powers out of our reach. Junker’s party didn’t get the majority of votes, yet 26 of our honest, democratic “friends” performed a coop which gave him the presidency. Why start something meant to be honest and democratic with such dishonesty? Oh it’s ok, we’re in the real dark ages as the EU can erase all this process and say it was voted through with unanimous support from every country.

        • JimBlue

          Remind me again, how many elections have their been since 1997? That’s right there have been 5. And since 1997 there has been an anti-EU party that people can vote for and to date that party whether Referendum in 1997 or UKIP subsequently has failed to win the election and the capacity to form a government. Therefore your claim that the UK has never had the opportunity to vote over the course of 40 years is void since clearly that is not the case.
          I agree with your point that UK Politicians said one thing and did another but apparently that didn’t really matter as they all got voted in again.
          As for Juncker’s party, it is only one of a block of parties and that is why he got elected, by the MEPs all of whom had been elected by their respective electorates. I don’t remember being asked to vote for David Cameron as Prime Minister, apparently he was appointed to the job by a subset of Tory MP

          • Chimp

            What we’re getting this year is a retrospective referendum, to ask if we want to get rid of something that was implemented for us. Any UK elections since the first (non) referendum, would just be retrospective, and the first time we got a hint of a referendum in a manifesto from a main political party was Cameron’s first one, with conditions the had to win another election, and then to get a majority. I appreciate a fringe party UKIP did push this, forcing the hand of a main party. But is that the sort of politics we advocate, vote for something, change what you voted for, many years and then fringe party forces conditions of main, but only after yet another election, and then another majority hurdle.

            I appreciate a party would want some sort of assurances that they would have to at least win an election before that part of the manifest was valid, but conditions for multiple wins and then majorities sounds like they were putting barriers in the way, and with the polls showing there wouldn’t be a majority, I don’t think we were MEANT to be here.

  • Matthew O’Malley

    It may be an old example but we need only to look at the Suez Crisis as to how America will treat an ‘ally’ when it’s strategic goals are placed under threat. We’ve spent the best part of the last century under the American boot; it’s time to start acting in our own best interests from now on.

  • BrickinaWall

    Shallow, weak, jingoistic article.

    Firstly the United States of America formed just such a union a couple of hundred years ago. Common currency, free movement, a goverment several times zones from some states…

    Secondly, a continent-sized country with a demographically budding population of 310+ million souls and enough in natural resources to exist in isolation from the rest of the world, should not, can not, be compared to a small island state that can’t even produce enough food for its rapidly greying people and desperately needs immigrants to keep functioning.

    The rest of the world is catching up quickly; Britain continues to navel gaze.

    A United States of Europe is the way forward.

    • Chimp

      Going from a justice system where we are judged by a jury and no-one is above the law to one where the people at the very top are immune from justice and the prosecutor and judge are the same is a massive step backwards (see corpus juris). Guilty until judged because Innocent until proven guilty does not exist and trials can be kept from the public if one party objects.

      • BrickinaWall

        Yes, you are correct, the EU is far from perfect. Which is why the UK needs to commit fully and take on a greater role in improving it.

        • Chimp

          Won’t happen from us unfortunately. Our law process gives people the benefit of the doubt to allow them to make a case, while making the EU decision makers liable. The EU Law is the complete opposite and we would never overturn it. It’s more democracy than they’re prepared to give, which has been clear with the UK only getting 1 referendum in 40 years, which was used for greater purposes than was asked.

          I’m not really bothered what perceived benefits they decide are ours, as having decision makers above the law WILL end up with something disastrous for us citizens. I can’t believe after all the things were put in place to disarm a certain country and prevent it happening again, a forward thinking continent raises a long dead undemocratic Roman Law and that’s not alarming.

    • lojolondon

      Vote to ‘remain’ if you want to be in the EUSSR and do not care about living in a democracy. But don’t complain when you are not allowed to write what you think in articles like this one!!

      • Chimp

        Also, with a tidal wave of young males being given to us with, vote to remain so our women should start covering up and prepare your female children to be under the impression that they are worthless. Same + death to homosexuals and different religious to them. How any woman could not consider events in multiple cities across europe to women that were nearly covered, and vote to remain is baffling.

        Or think logically to vote out of the lie we were conned with 40 years ago as our stance and ours alone has the power to save europe by being the first but not the last to leave and stop this economic migrant farce, which is Merkel’s way of both bolstering their population (with Israels neighbours, no-one mentioned that…) and blaming greece for not stopping them. EU(Germany) to take control of the greek borders? Well they’ve got the airports and snapped up all the land so may as well. Notice Germanys leader’s mask’s have slipped and threatening against other countries has started.

        And why would all the main parties support what will eventually make them usueless? I fear it’s because they will get immunity status from law as an EU government, or worse the EU Law of protecting the EU is in force because it’s been signed long ago. These brave OUT campaigners may face jail in the new EU. Stop.This.

        • mikewaller

          Immigration of the kind to which you particularly object was set in train during the “glory” days when the UK had totally sovereignty. The Tories saw cheap labour to undercut incredibly short-sighted labour militancy and Labour saw underprivileged incomers almost certain to vote for them. So, so much for sovereignty which, incidentally, was never the sovereignty of the people, but parliamentary sovereignty. We, as someone smart once said, are merely given periodic opportunities to elect our masters. Should they chose to treat us badly as individuals our only recourse is to the Courts which, “in the good old days” were themselves entire subservient to parliament.

          What is shameful is the way in which incomers still mange to get jobs when a sizeable section of the indigenous population can’t or won’t. Improve the employability of that section of our society and there will simply not be the jobs to be had by immigrants. But don’t hold your breath!

          • JimBlue

            Except the problem is that underprivileged incomers cannot vote for Labour or any other party since to be able to vote in a General Election you have to be a British citizen (which takes 5 years after entry to achieve if you are underprivileged) and in local election you have to be an EU citizen to vote.

            Or are you claiming that Labour had a long term plan to rig elections? Which is a bit daft as people coming to Britain will vote for the party which offers them the best way to achieve a prosperous life style.

          • mdj

            ..which for many people consists in drawing benefits, by comparison with what they left behind.
            As for your other point, I was present at a count where one ward had a turnout of 125%, due to an ‘accident’ at the count which gave 1000 fictitious votes to each Labour candidate.

      • mikewaller

        To liken the EU to the late and deeply unlamented USSR must position you well in the half-wit of the year stakes.

        • mdj

          That makes Gorbachev a half-wit, since this was his comparison also.

        • lojolondon

          Undemocratic, socialist, fast-reducing free speech, massive salaries and freebies including tax-free status for the in crowd, poverty and unproductive lives for the peasants, global ambitions, military aggression using other people’s sons – it is exactly the same. BTW, I see your other posts, you are probably the troll of the year.

          • tj

            ‘It’s exactly the same.’

            So why are Eastern European nations, which suffered so much under the Soviet yoke, so keen to join or remain in the EU?

          • lojolondon

            Two reasons – firstly, some believe it is different. secondly, most people do not want to be in, most politicians do want to be in. In the UK there is NO major party that opposes the EU, they are all professional politicians and they all want to become MP’s for Europe with far less responsibility, far more money, a great pension and tax rate of 0% plus unlimited expenses. Nice work if you have no morals and don’t care for your country.

          • tj

            If the EU is ‘exactly the same’ as the USSR why haven’t you been arrested for speaking against it?

          • Tony Conrad

            People who are desperate do not see the snares of what they are fleeing too. We do however and have a chance to change it thank goodness.

        • Tony Conrad

          I disagree. At the fall of the USSR Gorbachev was amazed at why Europe wanted to build a similar edifice. Some do not learn from history it seems.

          • mikewaller

            You may feel that Nato and the Warsaw pact were indistinguishable, but I don’t. Knowing what the Soviets were doing in Eastern Europe and to their own people, I was always deeply grateful for the American presence. Nor, for that matter, were there any Western European equivalents of the East German, Hungarian and Czechoslovakian risings so brutally put down by the Soviets.

            The problem with Russia is you never know what to expect next, other than that it likely to be very unpleasant. The Poles in particular had had centuries of suffering at Russian and German hands and were desperate to get into Nato to obtain the kind of security that offered. And given Russia’s total disregard for treaty obligations as shown in its recent annexation of The Crimea, who’s to blame them. The question now, of course, is whether it was wise to suggested that the same option might be open to The Ukraine. Certainly many of them also hate the Russians for the terrible sufferings they endured under Stalin (including mass starvation) and so they, too, yearned for such guarantees. With hindsight, the question that ought to have been asked was whether such guarantees would be honoured in the (highly likely) event of Russian aggression. As the true answer would almost certainly have been “No”, Nato membership should never have been suggested.

            However, there is a lesson from history you don’t seemed to have picked up: Having Russia with its barbarous leaders as a near neighbour is a misfortune of elephantine proportions.

      • BrickinaWall

        We have not been living in a democracy for generations, if indeed there was ever true democracy in this part of the world. If you think that there is a “freedom” in being allowed to write what you want on forums like this one you are, with all due respect, mistaken. We write on articles like this for our own personal entertainment, not because we believe that we are in any way contributing to any sort of democratic process.

        Furthermore, the kind of human rights and freedoms promoted by the EU are light years ahead of the kind on police state the UK’s rulers want (and have). The fact that the UK wants to roll back the human rights charter is an indication of this. A country with 2 million CCTV cameras is not a place where freedom and personal privacy are respected.

        We need to take a look at the Britain of the ’70s to remember what a mess this country was in. I’m not saying that the EU (EEC) magically fixed those problems! However, at a time of limited euro-integration the UK found itself looking inwards, operating as if the Empire still mattered and local industry bumbbled along believing in an inalienable right to dominate global markets. This was a mistake and it took the tough-love measures commonly attributed to Thatcher to put the country on a more competitive path.

        • Tony Conrad

          We have moved on and staying in the EU is of no benefit to us. Free trade would be nice but unfortunately the EU is very political and against our better interests.

          • BrickinaWall

            True, but every country in Europe feels that way. Which is a good thing, because the EU is meant to be bigger than just a collection of countries and as such each of them will have to give up something to build something better.

            Politics is everywhere and the type practised in Westminister is no less laughable than that in Brussels.

    • mdj

      ‘Common currency, free movement, a government several times zones from some states…’

      …founded on slavery, genocide and the wholesale reneging of treaties.
      Still keen?

      • SocietasDraconistrarumlit1

        The confederate states were dissolved and did not “found” anything. The 400,000 Africans brought in to help with cotton and tobacco before the emancipation proclamation did not “found” the Constitution or bill of rights either.

        Hey, by the way, how are the ancestors of the Irish slaves doing across the pond?

      • BrickinaWall

        Whereas as each of the individual members states of the EU have bloodless histories? Our disagreements with the EU and Europe are trivial in comparisson to the times when we were slaughtering each other.

    • Tony Conrad

      Who has brainwashed you? We can manage our own borders to receive who we need without Europe telling us who we have to have. Our economy is the fourth largest in the world.

      • BrickinaWall

        Oh wake up and smell the green tea.In a world where the population has topped 7 billion and continues to grow, the idea that the UK (<1%) will manage to maintain such influence by breaking ties with business partners is unrealistic, or that the the UK will be able to make the same trade deals that an EU bloc would get.

  • green hackle

    America cant even choose a Proper President for themselves, Never mind Telling us what they Think we should do, Obama has been a Useless Waste of Space, And If Russia, China, N Korea, The Mid East could not give a Toss what America Wants, They would have to be Even Thicker than they Sound if they Think we give a Toss what They Want..They are Becoming Second hand Allies and Hard to Trust when the Chips are Down..We Will vote out, Get on the Right side America, Or Shut the F,,, Up

  • WalterSEllis

    If Britain was the size of the USA and had the same population, it would not be joining the EU. As it happens, it has less than one-fifth America’ population and is (I think) one forty-third the size. Draw your own conclusions.

    • voidist

      Switzerland in not in the E.U. draw your own conclusions

      • WalterSEllis

        Switzerland has to follow 75 per cent of EU regulations without having any say over them. This is because the EU only permits free trade within the European Economic Area with countries that follow its rules. Regulations are simply handed over to Bern to implement. Switzerland is also a member of the Schengen Area and accepts the free movement of labour to the extent that it has more migrants per head of population than the UK. The 2014 referendum on immigration resulted, by a wafer-thin margin, in a victory for the anti-Schengen lobby, but two years on nothing has changed and another referendum, prompted by Swiss business interests, is in prospect.

        • voidist

          i couldnt disagree more with you….we have more autonomy than you might

          think…and we have a direct democracy….we recently voted not to have another mosque with a minaret on it…things you can only dream about
          in the rest of europe….
          regarding the referendum you are right…but i could list dozens of things that
          we can do here that others in europe cant.

          And to confirm what i am saying we are literally being overflooded by germans, italins and spainiards,,,escaping from E.U

          • Tony Conrad

            I think it is mostly Poles and Chinese where I live.

          • Jackthesmilingblack

            Lucky you.

        • Chimp

          That just proves that the EU can stifle non-EU countries and force them to join. They’re essentially completely surrounded and may just have to give up their country, not ever through war. Poor Swiss, the built the most secure bunkers which will now be used by an enemy. Unfortunately war that needs guns and tanks is the past, now the war happening in Europe is lies and propaganda and cover ups. Bunker doesn’t stop them.

      • Tony Conrad

        Neither is Norway and they still trade with the EU and are doing fine thank you.

    • Chimp

      Get UK in, strategic access to our commonwealth automatically granted for EU?

      • WalterSEllis

        First, it’s not “our” Commonwealth. It hasn’t been “British” for years. Second, the Commonwealth blows only hot air when it comes to free trade. Germany sells as much as the UK to Commonwealth countries, all of which (except the UK) continue to regulate their trade on a bilateral basis. By a factor of some five-to-one, Germany also outdoes us in exports to China.

        • Tony Conrad

          Yeah trade deals are international. This Europe thing is mad.

    • Mr B J Mann

      We should become the 51st State?!

  • big

    If the USA and the EU sign TTIP thats it! they’re as good as joined.If the UK thinks it can “leave” then it’s sadly mistaken. The unholy trinity of TTIP,TPP,and TiSA are destroying all meaning of the concept of sovereignty, we live in a post democratic world,a world in which American military might is used to enforce this reality,either unilaterally,or through NATO

  • xoanon

    The US wanting us to stay in the EU is the best reason to vote to leave, well that and the fact the EU want the Daesh supporting Turkish regime to join the union.

    • Tony Conrad

      That means hundreds of more Mosques in the UK and more tearing up of our countryside for houses, but I suppose if that’s what David wants we have to kow tow to it and also stay in the EU not.

  • voidist

    Has the US touched anything in the last 50 yrs thats not fallen apart ?

    • Chimp

      Well they were good right at the beginning by showing that they were the good guys by declaring their end to slavery, eventually, and homing your former enemies to mingle and stew with a protected religion promoting slavery. Black people at the same time of having a black president claim they are repressed. The top isn’t enough, they want control. Soon to happen in all EU countries

      • voidist

        they were good, i agree and thats why i said ” last 50 yrs “…but what have we had in the last 50 yrs ? vietnam…afganistan…iraq ….we now have a wife of a confirmed lair of an ex-president, running for office who is playing
        the race card by painting herself as Obamas new black sister…..and she might win….if that happens then the sun has surely long set on the US of A

        • Chimp

          No I meant it was either done on purpose to upset it’s own people, or it was to look good yet backfired. Either way it serves as a warning to us.

    • big

      NO!

      • OmnipotentWizard

        YES – its economy.

        • big

          That’s very debatable

          • OmnipotentWizard

            I guess they have the world’s largest economy by accident big?

          • big

            like i said its debatable

          • OmnipotentWizard

            It is very mature to own up when you’ve been shown to be wrong.

          • big

            go back to the original question,we weren’t talking about the size of its economy

  • Mr B J Mann

    I wonder how many of the supporters on staying IN because it’s supposedly to our economic advantage, would agree to a proper international analysis, and, if it’s even more advantageous to, say, join in an economic union with SE Asian countries, leaving the EU and joining them?

    Or, say, if it was economically more advantageous, rejoining the Commonwealth as a trading block?!

    Or, if it was the economically most advantageous option, becoming the 51st State of the Union?!

    What’s the betting NONE would agree to that however economically advantageous?!

    • Mr B J Mann

      And on top of the simple question of how many of the Remain side would agree to become the 51st state of the Union if it was shown to be more advantageous economically than remaining in the EU?!

      To which the answer is almost certainly NONE!

      That’s DESPITE also sharing a common language, legal system, Common Law, Bill of Rights, constitutional system………

      • OmnipotentWizard

        “To which the answer is almost certainly NONE!” Answering your own question makes you look as if you are frightened that someone will give you an answer you don’t like.

        The answer is – it depends on what the conditions are.

        • Mr B J Mann

          So name me half a dozen, three, one, even, who has argued they think we would be better IN than OUT, but demanded, for the economic good of the country, we should double check if we wouldn’t be better off OUT and IN the US.

          Go on then, over to you, put up or shut up.

          Answer my own question or it will make YOU look as if YOU are frightened that someone will give YOU an answer you don’t like.

          Or have I already done that?!

          • OmnipotentWizard

            The CBI, that’s 1500 direct and 188500 indirect members.

            Kerching!

          • Mr B J Mann

            “The CBI, that’s 1500 direct and 188500 indirect members.”

            argued they think we would be better IN than OUT, but demanded, for the economic good of the country, we should double check if we wouldn’t be better off OUT and IN the US.

            KerWHAT?!

            You’re dafter than a mindless EU supporter!

          • OmnipotentWizard

            Check their website and you’ll see most members want to stay IN. That is almost 200000 people that know more about the situation than you do and want to stay in.

            A bit more than your “name me half a dozen, three, one, even”

            Game, Set & Match to Wizard.

          • Mr B J Mann

            But none of them comply with what I asked.

            Not one.

            So Game, Set & Match to me.

      • WTF

        You don’t know that and answering your own question hardly gives it credibility with no facts or conditions attached.

        • Mr B J Mann

          Are you referring to my “What’s the betting….” continuation of my rhetorical question, which is, of course, a standard rhetorical format?

          In which case where does “credibility” come into it?

          What “facts or conditions” are “attached” to the EU supporters claims of the economic benefit of staying in, or, at least, what credible ones?!

          If you are referring to my follow up post, yes, some people call that “answering your own post”, and some of those go on to label I “wrong”.

          But as no one made them the official g3stap0 of the Internet, they have no credibility either.

          However, as I was “replying” to my own post because i’d accidentally hit post on a small Blackberry, while repling in Disqus notifications, and didn’t have time to track down where it had gone to immediately, and didn’t want to edit the unfinished post when I did, you could argue that gives me more, not less credibility,

          However, I digress:

          I didn’t say I knew the answer.

          However, if you think you do, feel free to name me half a dozen, three, one, even, EU supporter who has argued they think we would be better IN than OUT, but demanded, for the economic good of the country, we should double check if we wouldn’t be better off OUT and IN the US.

          Go on then, over to you!

          If you’re worried about your credibility feel free to attach your own facts or conditions.

          • WTF

            With no facts supplied from either a hypothetical JOIN the USA group or remain in the EU and given that they were the only choices, I’d definitely vote for the JOIN the USA vote for several reasons previously mentioned. They speak English, we’ve fought side by side on many occasions since their independence, we have a common culture and similar legal system. None of that is consistently true with any EU country, We’ve fought every country pretty much in Europe at some time over the past 200 years and even now there’s major acrimony between us unlike America.

            That said, I do agree that if self determination on our own is an option, at least 50% seem to want it and I’d agree with them and you that they’d prefer that rather than becoming a 51st state. Personally I’d need to look closer at any benefits or downsides whether I’d want the UK to become a 51st state or not but I certainly want to see it out of the EU.

          • Mr B J Mann

            I was only raising the US as an option to demonstrate that the EU supporters aren’t really looking for a good deal, they just want to be in the EU for ideological reasons.

            If they really believed we should be looking to join a block for economic reasons they would be evaluating ALL the options.

            But they NEVER do!

          • WTF

            Good lateral thinking, as you’ve scotched the peace claims previously by dissecting that list, and all that’s really left is being in a trading block and there’s more than one in the world than the EU and perhaps we could be better served elsewhere. I did notice on a site showing stats about our trade and unlike the EU we have a positive balance of trade with everyone else except India and that is probably due to all that off shore service cr*p that I believe we should halt for several reasons especially security.

    • Tony Conrad

      We arer quite capable of making our own trade agreements. EU export far more to us than we to them. It’s a mirage this economic benefit of staying in the EU. If Iceland can make their own trade deal with a country like China I am sure the UK could make trade deals with whoever it wants.

    • OmnipotentWizard

      Any group which makes us richer would be good to join. We are already members of the World Bank, WTO & IMF.

      • Mr B J Mann

        Exactly.

        But how many of the EU supporters would agree to swap from the EU to the US if it would make us richer and better off to do so?!

        None, I’d wager!

        Proving their object is political, not economic!

        • OmnipotentWizard

          Most people would agree the swap if it made us richer. The public aren’t interested in esoteric notions of sovereignty or an exaggerated immigration crisis it is wealth that drives them.

          • Mr B J Mann

            Why didn’t you answer the question?!

            I specifically asked about the people who keep telling us we must stay in the EU (and get ever closer politically) because we will be better off economically.

            I specifically asked about the people who keep “forgetting” to tell us we must check out whether staying in the EU (and getting ever closer politically) will be better off economically than, say, going into a union with the US.

            And as for the public not being interested in “esoteric” notions of “sovereignty”, what about the ~50% of Scots who would rather leave the UK regardless of whether they would be worse off financially?

            What about the IRA and it’s supporters who preferred to leave a cushy, subsidised life in the UK and join an at the time impoverished Eire?

            And we’ve had discussions on these pages about the Islamification of the Balkans currently and in the past:

            The Serbs in Serbia and the rest of Yugoslavia, eg Bosnia, are the indigenous inhabitants who would rather pay taxes to the Turks, hand over their first born sons (who would be cast rated) and their prettiest daughters, and become third class citizens in their own land rather than accept Islam.

            There are a lot of people of whom you’d be very wrong to claim:

            “It is wealth that drives them.”

            How many rugby players or supporters would want their club to switch to soccer for the wealth?!

            Or even a rival code of rugby?!

          • OmnipotentWizard

            “Why didn’t you answer the question?!” Because it depends under what conditions. As the 51st state we would lost control of out Government whereas under the EU we don’t.

            The “ever closer politically” is a red herring now. The debate is around stay in under the Cameron deal which excludes this. So lets debate current reality please.

            “50% of Scots who would rather leave the UK regardless of whether they would be worse off financially?” Then they should have voted that way in their referendum,.

            “What about the IRA…” Now you are starting to wander..

            “And we’ve had discussions on these pages about the Islamification of the Balkans ” Good for you.

          • Mr B J Mann

            So the pro EU / Join / Stay Remaìn crowd that insist it’s for our own economic good (un)surprisingly never insist on a global review to find the best option because it depends on the options?!?!?!!!!

            Just the sort of brain dead nonsense you’d expect from a brain dead EU supporter with no sense!

          • OmnipotentWizard

            How would this mythical global review take place. We would first have to spend twenty years negotiating with the US to find what the conditions were before we could compare them. In the meantime we would still be in the EU while zillions of pound were spent on this pointless exercise…. Back in the real World…

            The CBI who know more about economics that you want to stay IN.

          • goodsoldier

            Christine Defarge of the IMF also wants to stay in. She is an EU cheerleader and has been promoting the EU for years now. It’s not surprising that the CBI agrees.

          • OmnipotentWizard

            The fact she is more knowledgeable than you (just like the CBI) probably helps as well.

          • goodsoldier

            I sincerely hope she is more knowledgeable than I. She gives a very good impression of being elegant and intelligent. The CBI wants us to REMAIN possibly because it is funded by the EU. It is important to look at the connections people and organizations have to the EU to gauge the degree of impartiality they are capable of.

          • OmnipotentWizard

            It is probably better to look at whether members of the CBI (who receive no EU funding) agree with the CBI position or not.

          • zappata

            And she’s getting a second term because she obligingly changed the IMF rules so Ukraine could default but stay with the programme.

          • Mr B J Mann

            yAgain deflecting from the points at issue.

            All that is irrelevant.

            If the “in -crowd” were REALLY concerned about what is economically best for the UK then THEY WOULD ALREADY, years ago, BEFORE joining, and, failing that, for the previous twenty years, first have spent those twenty years negotiating with the US (and others, including the EU) to find what the conditions would be, then compared them, before we could consider joining, or remaining in, the EU.

            Your reply fails to list one single person or organisation that proposed this, as you previously claimed, wrongly.

            In fact, your post confirms no one has even considered it.

            In fact, your post confirms that no one has ever even made the analysis for joining/staying in the EU.

            Because the inners consider that, in your words, it would cost zillions of pounds. And I doubt even the inners would dare claim the benefits of “in” exceed zillions of pounds!

            So you’ve confirmed that not only were you lying when you said there are people who advocated considering alternative economic partnerships.

            But you were lying when you said that it’s known that we’re better of in the EU.

            Or have you got a breakdown of the CBI expenditure of zillions of pounds to work it out?!

            Did someone the real world?!

          • OmnipotentWizard

            “Your reply fails to list one single person or organisation that proposed this,…” I deal in current reality rather than worrying about what happened 50years ago.

            “In fact, your post confirms no one has even considered it.” It does nothing of the sort. I’m sure lots of things have been considered at various points in history. But back to today…

            “…no one has ever even made the analysis for joining/staying in the EU…” Its been analysed to death. Before we joined and before the previous referendum. The fact that you don;t like the outcome doesn’t mean it didn’t happen.

            “…I doubt even the inners would dare claim the benefits of “in” exceed zillions of pounds!” That rather depends over what time period and exactly how much a zillion is.

            “So you’ve confirmed that not only were you lying…”
            lying (v) – expressing an opinion that BJ Mann doesn’t like.

            “Or have you got a breakdown of the CBI expenditure of zillions of pounds to work it out?!” The current decision is between IN and OUT and not some mythical undefined thing that no one is offering. And so back in the real World the CBI have decided that IN is best and they know more than you do.

          • Mr B J Mann

            So you were lying about the inners having considered all options for the best economic block to join.

            And you were lying about the CBI ans thousands of its individual members having done so.

            And loadsa economists.

            And you were lying about it costing zillions of pounds to do the analysis.

            And you are lying about lying being – expressing an opinion that BJ Mann doesn’t like:

            It’s you expressing an opinion you can’t back up and pretending it’s a fact.

            And you’re lying when you say uou deal in current reality: even if you’d been telling the truth on the other points you would be worrying about what happened 50years ago and lots of things have been considered at various points in history and analysed to death, before we joined, and before the previous referendum.

            But back to today… dealing in current reality rather than worrying about what happened 50years ago, and not some mythical undefined thing that no one in the In camp or the EU is offering or can offer, and so back in the real World:

            Schengen is breaking up, ever closer union is breaking down, the Euro is sinking, the EU economy is collapsing, and Britain needs to Brexit before it goes down with the sinking ship!

            The fact that you don’t like the outcome doesn’t mean it isn’t going to happen.

            Nor does your belief in some mythical undefined thing that no one is offering mean it can survive.

          • OmnipotentWizard

            “So you were lying about the inners having considered all options for the best economic block to join.” Just because you say something doesn’t make it so. Using you (distorted) logic I could say that you have lied by claiming that all options haven’t been considered – but I’m not as irrational as you.

            “And you were lying about the CBI ans thousands of its individual members having done so.” If you read my posts (carefully this time) then I said ” The CBI who know more about economics that you want to stay IN”. Pretending I said something else and then criticising me for it is just a little childish.

            “And you were lying about it costing zillions of pounds to do the analysis.” You do seem to have a lot of trouble with the meaning of the word “lying”.

            If you want a sensible debate then read your dictionary and check what a lie is and then come back.

          • Mr B J Mann

            Pot, kettle…..

            Try actually reading MY posts.

            And then try actually reading YOUR “replies”.

            I get more sense out of noeL nosefloW!

            8< ———-

          • OmnipotentWizard

            Game, Set & Match to Wizard again.

          • Mr B J Mann

            You’re making as much sense as the dribbling noeL nosefloW!

          • Mr B J Mann

            You claimed:

            >> >> >> “‘Most people would agree the swap if it made us richer. The public aren’t interested in esoteric notions of sovereignty or an exaggerated
            immigration crisis it is wealth that drives them.'”

            I responded:

            >> >> “And as for the public not being interested in “esoteric” notions of
            “sovereignty”, what about the ~50% of Scots who would rather leave the
            UK regardless of whether they would be worse off financially?”

            (~ = “Around”)

            You replied:

            >> ‘ “50% of Scots who would rather leave the UK regardless of whether they
            would be worse off financially?” Then they should have voted that way in
            their referendum,.’

            They did:

            You cunningly cutting the crucial “~”.

            I asked:

            >> >> “What about the IRA and it’s supporters who preferred to leave a cushy, subsidised life in the UK and join an at the time impoverished Eire?”

            To which your logical counter-argument was:

            >> ‘ “What about the IRA…” Now you are starting to wander..’

            And as for your reply of:

            >> ‘ “And we’ve had discussions on these pages about the Islamification of the Balkans ” Good for you.”

            In response to what was actually:

            >> >> “The Serbs in Serbia and the rest of Yugoslavia, eg Bosnia, are the
            indigenous inhabitants who would rather pay taxes to the Turks, hand
            over their first born sons (who would be cast rated) and their prettiest
            daughters, and become third class citizens in their own land rather
            than accept Islam.”

            >> >> “There are a lot of people of whom you’d be very wrong to claim:”

            >> >> “It is wealth that drives them.”

            Words fail me………………………………..

            You are truly nothing but a troll!

  • Frank Natoli

    America would never join anything like the EU. Yet they urge us to stay.
    “They”? They who? You mean the Obama Administration? You mean our world government Socialists? Yes, “they” believe in the biggest most tyrannical government. BTW, “they” will be out of power in about ten months.

    • SocietasDraconistrarumlit1

      We can hope so. Trump might just be another Ross Perot.

    • OmnipotentWizard

      If you know where the New World Order hold their meetings can you let me know. I have a friend who’d like to tender for the catering contract.

  • sgassoc

    How about joining the US as our 52 state? Guaranteed admiration and respect from all our numerous Anglophiles, total autonomy like Peurto Rico, superb military protection, common language, and all those adoring yanks! Fukk the EU, it was a horrible idea to begin with. The Germans and French hate you and speak a foul tongue. USA would guarantee another thousand years of English power and prestige.

    • WTF

      There’s a lot to be said for that with a common ancestry, culture, ideology, fighting alongside each other against oppression and so on. Even their legal system is closer to ours than Europes. In two world wars in the 20th century we’ve held the standard for human rights and justice and America came in to back us whilst in the 1930’s, Germany, Italy & Spain were fascist states and Russia flip flopped whilst killing millions. I think we know who our long term friends are as we’ve been friends for a lot longer with the USA compared to all other EU states.

      • Jackthesmilingblack

        Separating the good guys from the bad guys?
        Can I get back to you on that?

        • WTF

          Just saying that since 1650 (UK civil war) as an Island we haven’t been engulfed in a major war on our soil unlike Europe that has been racked with 100’s of wars.

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_conflicts_in_Europe

          Maybe that has a lot do with our common ancestry of being a lot closer to America despite their war of independence from us. Even they have had only one subsequent conflict (Civil war) since becoming a country in their own right whilst the petty wars in Europe continued.

          The point here is that European countries by their nature are petty & vindictive towards each other and even now there are internal conflicts in countries like Spain where certain regions want independence and in certain cases will try and take it by force. Before you bring up N. Ireland or Scotland, neither have caused civil war to erupt unlike the sort of thing we had with the Spanish Civil war. We should also remember that countries like Spain, Portugal & Greece were run by military dictatorships just a few decades ago unlike the USA or UK.

          That is one of the reasons the EU is incompatible with the mind set of the UK,

          • Pete Howard

            So the EU is incompatible with the UK because Spain had a civil war and has separatist groups that use violence? And even though Ireland has separatist groups that use violence that’s not the same thing because Ireland didn’t have a civil war (although it did of course)?

            And even though the US had a civil war, that’s not the same thing because they haven’t had any wars since (except of course a few little skirmishes like Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq and countless covert and overt invasions of other American countries).

            Also, wasn’t the American war of independence a major war on British soil? After all, it was British until it was lost. What about the Falklands war? The Boer war? The various Anglo-Indian conflicts? What about the Blitz? The Battle of Britain?

            So in conclusion, the UK is more compatible with the US because neither has had any wars for a very long time (except all of those wars that did happen) whereas those petty Europeans are warring all of the time, especially the surrender-monkey French? And the fact that many more people were killed as a result of the troubles than as a result of Spanish separatist terrorism is a clear indication that all Europeans are petty and vindictive compared to us Brits who are the bastions of justice against oppression with an unrivaled record of conquering and occupying, through violence, many many countries?

            Have I understood correctly?

          • WTF

            The Northern Ireland ‘troubles’ were not a civil war, they are more akin to ISIS albeit less brutal, by a bunch of retarded criminals for the most part just like ISIS. Definition of a civil war – a war between political factions or regions within the same country. Spanish civil war, American civil war and I suggest you peruse the hundreds in the link that are real civil wars. Ireland’s fight for Independence was not a civil war and neither was the IRA a civil war as that’s like Bader Meinhof, Red Brigade and ETA.

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_civil_wars

            Civil wars are the attempt by one group within a country to take over the country as happened in Spain, America but the American War of Independence has a clue in its name, Independence NOT Civil war !

            To make it easier for you to understand, my point was that democracy as we understand it today has been around for a much longer time in the UK and USA than say Spain (40 years), Portugal (40 years), Greece (40 years). Interestingly is the fact that all three countries turned to democracy at the same time and that might well happen in the EU when a bunch of countries might ‘secede’ from the EU at the same time.

          • Tony Conrad

            The EU is not democratic and is reverting to type. Why O why do we not see it?

          • Tony Conrad

            Don’t forget Germany who practically run the EU. No history of democracy there either as in Italy as well.

          • Jackthesmilingblack

            Authority must realise that Brits will never take it to the streets, miners strike and poll tax riots not withstanding.

          • Mr B J Mann

            Interestingly, from that list of conflicts in Europe, which the EU fans insist the “EU” has prevented since “its” inception (as the European Coal and Steel Community – Treaty signed 1951, ratified 1952) here’s the list of the European conflicts it’s prevented:

            NOT!

            1953 Uprising in East Germany

            1956 Uprising in Poznań

            1956 Hungarian Revolution

            1956–1962 Operation Harvest – IRA

            1958 First Cod War

            1959–2011 Basque Conflict – joined “EU” in 1986

            1968 Warsaw Pact invasion of Czechoslovakia

            1968–1998 The Troubles

            1970–1984 Unrest in Italy – Red Brigades, etc – France gave ASYLUM to Italian TERRORISTS!

            1972–1973 Second Cod War – EU members UK, Germany and Belgium

            1974 Turkish invasion of Cyprus

            1975-1976 Third Cod War – EU member UK

            1988–1994 Nagorno-Karabakh War

            1989 Romanian Revolution

            1991 Ten-Day War (Slovenia) – fomented by EU

            1991–1992 Georgian war against Russo-Ossetian alliance

            1991–1993 Georgian Civil War

            1991–1995 Croatian War of Independence – fomented by EU

            1992 War of Transnistria

            1992 Ossetian-Ingush conflict

            1992–1993 First Georgian war against Russo-Abkhazian alliance

            1992–1995 Bosnian War – fomented by EU

            1993 Cherbourg incident – EU members Britain & France

            1993 Russian constitutional crisis

            1994–1996 First Chechen War

            1997 Unrest in Albania – fomented by gang bosses who mysteriously all managed to escape of be released from Greek prisons at just the right time, peacekeeping led by Italian forces, supported by French, Greek, German and Austrian forces, oh, and Romanian ones, and, erm, Turkish ones, plus the EU supporting United States (notice a pattern there?!), but the weapons managed to end up in the EU supported Kosovo wars?!?!

            1998–1999 Kosovo War – fomented by EU

            1998–present Dissident Irish Republican campaign – EU member states

            1998 Second Georgian war against Russian-Abkhazian alliance

            1999 Dagestan War

            1999–2009 Second Chechen War

            1999–2001 Insurgency in the Preševo Valley – Kosovo – EU resulting from EU meddling

            21st century

            2001 Insurgency in the Republic of Macedonia – resulting from EU meddling

            2002 Perejil Island crisis – EU protagonist vs Morocco

            2004-2013 Unrest in Kosovo
            – fomented by EU

            2004 unrest in Kosovo – fomented by EU

            2008 unrest in Kosovo – fomented by EU

            2011–2013 North Kosovo crisis – fomented by EU

            2004 Georgia, Adjara crisis

            2006 Georgia, Kodori crisis

            2007–present Civil war in Ingushetia

            2008 Russia–Georgia war

            2009–present Insurgency in the North Caucasus

            2013–present Euromaidan and pro-Russian conflict in Ukraine – fomented by EU

            2014 Crimean crisis – fomented by EU

            2014–present War in Donbass – fomented by EU

            Plus, of course, Libya and Syrian both fomented by EU

          • WTF

            Excellent, thanks for a brilliant summary of EU failures or perhaps better putas inaction against wars on their watch and in their region and elsewhere.

          • Mr B J Mann

            No problemo!

          • Mr B J Mann

            Don’t forget to acknowledge the original link you gave too!

      • Tony Conrad

        There is a lot of truth in what you say. Even now the leadership of the EU are not elected by the countries in the EU. Why does Merkel have so much power over us and our borders? Something is dreadfully wrong. Our history of democracy needs to be carried on and not given to those who do not have a long history of democracy.

    • SocietasDraconistrarumlit1

      Only if we could adopt an immigration policy similar to the Australian model. Only more rigorous.

      • OmnipotentWizard

        That would kill UK business.

        • SocietasDraconistrarumlit1

          Trade policies and immigration policies are separate. If a person has something to bring to the table, then they should be required to naturalize and become a true citizen. Work visas should be issued again to those who have something to offer and should be enforced. Illegal immigrants and economic anarchists who have no money, education, job skills, or desire to work and better themselves have already begun to destroy Sweden, France, and Germany. I would hate to see that level of problem in the UK because they followed suit. In the net 30 years we very likely could see borders shift in Europe and dissolution of sovereign states…again.

          • OmnipotentWizard

            “Trade policies and immigration policies are separate.” Incorrect. No one area of Government can or should be considered in isolation.

            “If a person has something to bring to the table, then they should be required to naturalize and become a true citizen.” My son works in Belgium but is a UK citizen. He doesn’t know (much) French or Flemish. Should they expel him? What about the million plus Brits in Spain?

            “Illegal immigrants and economic anarchists who have no money,…” I’m not sure who these “economic anarchists” are but as for Immigrants – they will be paying your pension in a few years.

            “…have already begun to destroy Sweden, France, and Germany.” You should probably read a different newspaper. Over the years immigration has made those countries (and ourselves) rich. The current Syria crisis will be over soon.

            “In the net 30 years we very likely could see borders shift in Europe and dissolution of sovereign states…” The current offer on the table explicitly excludes that so lets keep the discussion around reality instead of some alternative universe.

          • SocietasDraconistrarumlit1

            I agree that the left hand should know what the right is doing.The idea that unchecked immigration is necessary for a robust economy is absurd.

            Your son is abroad working and probably going to school. In the US we would grant him a work and student visa. Our laws require that he be properly vetted and renew his visa or become a citizen. Currently our government only enforces these laws if you are nationality other than South American. For some reason they keep getting a free pass. The economic refugees are illegal and breach the 1951 agreement and definition of asylum seekers.

            There will be no one paying my pension in a few years. I have always been self employed. I employ around 45 people and will not be relying on foreign immigrants to pay my, or anyone else pensions. The immigrants do pay in to social security, however, the illegals take more than they give and as far as SS, the government keeps illegally spending it on other things.

            The burden of the welfare system, combined with multiculturalism will collapse Sweden and other EU nations will follow. No nation can or ever has survived having more takers than producers. Nor has any nation ever survived cultural suicide in the name of multiculturalism. To survive time, you must be ONE NATION working collectively. There is a reason that GB and now the UK have been global superpowers since before that was a title. Don’t destroy it.

    • Tony Conrad

      Europe doesn’t understand democracy. Look at their record. Why O why are we coming under them more and more?

      • OmnipotentWizard

        In what way are we coming MORE under them?

    • OmnipotentWizard

      We are not like the Americans. We are more secular and rational.

      • sgassoc

        Impotent, flaccid response
        typical of all liberals Your secular rational world got you what? Irrelevance and near poverty from being the worlds greatest empire…the sun never set.

        • OmnipotentWizard

          Sorry if I upset you. I’m not at all sure what the Empire has got to do with anything. I could say America tried to get its own Empire and failed – but that would also be irrelevant and so I won’t.

          As for poverty you will notice that we have the 5th largest economy (thank you EU) and are due to overtake Germany shortly. Not bad for a small island on the edge of a large continent. Not bad for a country with less than 1% of the World’s population.

          I love the US (I lived near San Francisco for a while) but it does have its problems. There are pockets of poverty that you would never find in the UK. Intolerance (often driven by religion) is such in some areas that you can be shot for having the wrong opinion.

          An English friend of mine moved to Atlanta and the fist question his neighbours asked him is – what Church do you below to and when he said he didn’t go they became less friendly. Very disconcerting.

          Gun deaths (mainly accidental) are very high. Crime (especially Murder) is much higher.

          The US sense of humour is very different.

          No the British in character are close to Australians (I’ve lived there as well in Adelaide) and New Zealanders….and the Irish who are less releigious than they like to pretend. We sure ain’t close the Americans from the mid-West or the Southern states.

        • big

          I take it you’re American?

      • Mr B J Mann

        Unlike Obama and the Clintons!

    • big

      …no it wouldn’t ,and why does english history,power, prestige etc, always seem to be a thousand years old? didn’t anything exist before that?

      • Mr B J Mann

        Because that’s when England started.

        Before that you had numerous kingdoms all over the land.

        Don’t you know ANYHING?!

  • WTF

    Lets put the record straight here, its only Kerry & Obama sticking their nose into UK business because it suits their socialist agenda for us to be locked into a mega socialist state. Other US politicians have correctly stayed neutral on the issue.

  • joamerican

    Most Americans like myself would NOT urge you to stay. I say get out while you can!

    • Tony Conrad

      Obama has betrayed the American Constitution so we cannot listen to him.

      • OmnipotentWizard

        In what way?

        • SocietasDraconistrarumlit1

          “In what way” Has the current POTUS violated the US Constitution and Bill of Rights

          1. Obamacare and the constant change of implementation thereof.
          2. A dozen instances of EPA over reach
          3. Cap and trade policies
          4. Granting legal status to illegal aliens while sponsoring sanctuary cities and restricting/ refusing enforcement of immigration laws. Including the 2006 Secure Fence Act.
          5. Open Internet Law (Illegal use of the FCC)
          6. Abuse of IRS to target political opposites
          7. Operation Fast and Furious. (Illegally running weapons to Mexican drug cartels)
          8. Trashing the work requirement in the welfare laws
          9. Proxy wars, drone strikes on sovereign foreign governments, and destabilizing the Middle East and North Africa. Esp. Libya,Yemen, Somalia, Iraq, and Syria, thus opening the flood gates of illegal immigration into Europe. This was likely more the work of the EU elite as well as Turkey and Saudi Arabia. The USA has been elected as Sergeant at Arms for the EU since the Korean wars.
          10. Inciting the worst racial divide since the 50’s and 60’s by demonizing police and putting criminals living in gang life cities on pedestals as the role model citizen who are victims of evil whitey.Exploiting the same for votes and power grabs.
          11. Benghazi that was a result of 9. and the attempted cover up.
          12. Violating the WARN act before getting re elected.
          13. Interfering with the legal elections in Crimea
          14. Massive Federal Land Grabs. ( More over reach by the BLM and EPA)

          There are many more. It’s late and I don’t feel like looking them up.

          • OmnipotentWizard

            So you’ve worked out how to use cut-and-post.

            There are mechanisms in place for Government to stop the President breaching the constitution. The fact that he taken the some of the actions you mention (most of your points were just opinions) and they haven’t been successfully challenged means that he hasn’t transgressed.

            The fact you disagree with Obamacare (for example) doesn’t mean it breaches the constitution. You live in a democracy and if most people want something you disagree with then that is tough for you.

            Now man up and be glad you don’t live in most other countries in the World.

          • SocietasDraconistrarumlit1

            Actually, that is my own work. Feel free to plagiarize. The truth will set you free.

          • SocietasDraconistrarumlit1

            I am very glad to live where I live. My maternal sides were colonist from the mid 15th century.

            The ACA will be changed or replaced and the EPA has been stopped in some ways but not in others, the BLM has been challenged, the IRSwas stopped and should have, but will not be prosecuted. It would be great if a future president dissolved such entities. However, they get into office and must follow the money. Our loss of Justice Scalia will not help the cause.

            I don’t know how to stop the EU globalist from using our military as their gestapo. It’s getting worse not better. Perhaps if the EU nations met their obligations on defense spending as was agreed upon. Apparently our politicians and corporations have found ways to get rich that way.

  • joamerican

    Democracy does not ensure peace. When a nation is governed according to the voice of its people, its actions will mirror the righteousness or wickedness of its people.

    • Tony Conrad

      True. The majority can be wrong and often are, but there is a safety exit if things get too bad.

    • OmnipotentWizard

      “Democracy does not ensure peace.” There is only one instance in history where two democracies have gone to war with each other. So democracy does ensure peace QED.

      • Mr B J Mann

        And look at how many times the EU has fomented wars.

        So the EU is not a democracy!

        QED!!!

        • OmnipotentWizard

          The EU has fomented no wars. The EU isn’t a country. EU members haven’t made war against any other democracy.

          Trying to defend you original indefensible position will make you look daft.

          • Mr B J Mann

            Keep on tryìng to defend your EU pension!

          • OmnipotentWizard

            Wizard Rule 77: People that are losing an argument will often try to discredit the person they are arguing with. (In football this tactic is known as “Playing The Man”)

          • Mr B J Mann

            Whereas you’ve been playing the Mann.

            And what is the tactic of making up names and even rules known as?!

            Especially 77 of them?!

          • OmnipotentWizard

            82 of them. Everything from:

            Wizard Rule 1: God didn’t create religion; religion created God.

            to

            Wizard Rule 82: Only rich people can afford principles.

          • Mr B J Mann

            Wow!

            You must think you were spawned by religion!

          • goodsoldier

            They sure gave it a good try in the the Ukraine with that dingbat Catherine Ashton in charge. Is she the best the EU could have in that role? Is this what we have to expect appointed to top positions that have ramifications throughout the world. The Dingbat Ashton was put beside Kerry in the Iran talks and he also was appalled by her, but Obama had told him earlier that she was one of them, so cooperate with her.

            Now it looks as thought NATO and the EU have merged interests. Perhaps it is because the children of EU and NATO personnel go to the same expensive private schools in Europe funded by us, the poor slob taxpayer. They make friends and do deals on Parent’s evening. What a happy community of shysters!

          • OmnipotentWizard

            “They sure gave it a good try in the the Ukraine…” With your simplistic view of a complex situation I suggest you never enter politics.

            “Perhaps it is because the children of EU and NATO personnel go to the same expensive private school…” Very catty. Once again:

            Wizard Rule 77: People that are losing an argument will often try to discredit the person they are arguing with. (In football this tactic is known as “Playing The Man”)

          • Mr B J Mann

            “The EU has fomented no wars. The EU isn’t a country.”

            IS!S isn’t a country! Probably hasn’t even got an anthem!! Hasn’t stopped it starting wars!!!

            Or did you mean to say the EU isn’t a democracy?!

            And you clearly are unfamiliar with the Balkan and the Ukraine fiascos.

            Trying to defend YOUR original indefensible position will make you look daft.

          • OmnipotentWizard

            Bringing ISIS in? You seem to be floundering a bit here.

            “Or did you mean to say the EU isn’t a democracy?!” Putting words into someones mouth is very childish.

            “And you clearly are unfamiliar with the Balkan and the Ukraine fiascos.” Quite right – anyone you disagree with obviously doesn’t know the facts (warning: post may contain sarcasm)

          • Mr B J Mann

            And you seem to be floundering more than a box of founder in a floundermonger’s flounder display!

            Let me know when you’ve managed to formulate a reasoned response.

        • Tony Conrad

          All the wars were started by dictators. Europe does not have a long history of democracy as we have. Why we entrust our future to them I cannot guess.

      • Tony Conrad

        It might not be perfect but at least you have a safety valve.

        • OmnipotentWizard

          “It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried.” (Winston Churchill)

          Democracy does ensure peace but there is also another factor that helps – Global Capitalism. The more our economies are interlinked the less likely war is as it is bad for business to attack your customer.

          But remember that since WW2 the number of people killed in conflicts as fallen with each decade.

          • goodsoldier

            No thanks to the EU which has done just as much for peace as the Brussels Theosophical society.

          • OmnipotentWizard

            …by ensuring there has been no war within the group in seventy years.

          • goodsoldier

            Thanks to NATO, not the EU. Don’t give the EU credit where it is not due.

          • OmnipotentWizard

            You might want to close your eyes to the fact because it suits your prejudices but there has been no wars within the EU area since WW2.

            NATO are responsible for the external borders where there have been wars.

          • goodsoldier

            Bosnian War? Tell me what the EU did?

          • OmnipotentWizard

            Didn’t you know Bosnia wasn’t a member of the EU?

          • goodsoldier

            Oh so we only care about the EU and don’t care about Europe. Then why do all the Europhiles keep saying that the EU has kept Europe from war since 1945?

            Anyhow, the EU has done nothing to prevent war. Without the EU, there wouldn’t have been a war anyhow. And had there been rumblings, what would the EU have done? Sent in U.S. troops? The EU has no way to defend itself, and it does not have a demos that would care to defend the EU. This is the major problem with the EU that it cannot correct for all its insane propaganda. Nobody loves it, because it is a phoney construct and a has no soul. Watch the pitiful Schultz speaking about the betrayals of ego nation states on Hardtalk. I thought after the cold war, we wouldn’t see types like him again. At least he tells the truth, which our europhile MPs wouldn’t dare do knowing the public would be shocked Merkel also can’t hide her authoritarian intentions. She hasn’t adapted to Western democracy;; for too long she was an apparatchik in the DDR and she doesn’t really understand what she has done.

          • goodsoldier

            Remember the Balkans? When fighting broke out in 1991, the then chair of the EU’s Foreign Affairs Council declared that this was “the hour of Europe, not the hour of the Americans – if one problem can be solved by the Europeans, it is the Yugoslav problem.” This suited the Americans: by all means, let the uniting Europeans pacify their own backyard without the help of the US Air Force. But the EU failed and Yugoslavia fell into an abyss of ethnic cleansing at the cost of 150,000 lives.
            (Fraser, Telegraph)

  • Bodkinn

    Since when have the Americans willed us to do anything that is not more in their interests then ours. Just think of the wars we have gotten into that without American influence we would have stayed well out of. We have to thank Harold Wilson for our not being involved in the Vietnam fiasco. At the present time they have the likelihood of more trouble on the home front than they can deal with so would be better saving their advice for internal use.

    • Tony Conrad

      You have to give credit for the USA in two world wars which we would have surely lost without their help.

  • richard

    Well thankyou America for wanting Britain to remain in the biggest communist failing dictatorship called the EU.

  • WomanInterrupted

    Sorry America, in this instance we will have to disagree.

  • tj

    America itself is ‘something like the EU’! A political union of separate states. And the US wish for us to remain in the EU because a Brexit would strengthen an irredentist Russia.

    • Tony Conrad

      Nothing like the EU. America elects it’s leader. We cannot.

  • Sam Griffin

    “Unite your own continent into a superstate first before you tell us to do the same.”
    Isn’t that exactly how the U.S.A. formed?

    • colchar

      Only if you are ignorant enough to think that the U.S.A. comprises an entire continent. Canada and Mexico would disagree with your interpretation.

      • Mr B J Mann

        And Iceland, Bahamas, Bermudas, Caribbean Islands………

      • Sam Griffin

        Last time I checked the E.U. doesn’t cover the entire continent of Europe either.

  • SocietasDraconistrarumlit1

    Dissolve the UN shadow government and take the schengen agreement back to the darkest depths of heII where it originated. Only the globalist puppet politicians and their liberal sheep want the UN to exist.

    • Bert3000

      I presume you never ever cross a national border. Or does your hatred of the freedom to travel not apply to yourself?

      • SocietasDraconistrarumlit1

        I have a passport. Everyone else should try it.

    • OmnipotentWizard

      The UN have almost solved global poverty and many diseases – best let them complete that work first.

      • SocietasDraconistrarumlit1

        That’s a good one. LOL. The UN has definitely reduced any chance of their own poverty by creating an illegal multi state government that increases its own wealth and power by exploiting poor people in third world countries. You don’t think all the countries in Africa and the middle east being DE stabilized was an accident do you?

        Not to mention legal elections everywhere being influenced by outside interests and monies while the USA gets elected to be Sergeant at Arms since being pushed into intervention in WWI.

  • Bert3000

    America is something like the EU.

    • Tony Conrad

      Nothing like it. They are one country like the UK. Europe can never be like that. We have no power over the leadership as they have there.

      • OmnipotentWizard

        “They are one country like the UK.” They were not one country. The independent states came together and pooled some sovereignty to form the USA. They haven’t looked back since.

        • colchar

          And they formed a single state, not a group of states.

          • WTF

            Pardon, the name is United States of America not the United State of America.

          • OmnipotentWizard

            Many state legislatures would disagree with you.

        • Mr B J Mann

          You mean like England Scotland Wales and Ireland?!

          Although there was too much central control so it started to break up/re-patriate powers!!!

        • Mr B J Mann

          Yes, one country like the UK, Spain, Germany…….

          Which all have several sub-states.

          The US is a con/federation like those countries.

          It would be like the EU if it merged with Canada, Iceland, Mexico, and twenty odd other Central and South American countries, including some very small ones, perhaps tax-havens, who all had equal say on some levels with the US, but who were in what was basically a big, unelected, unaccountable quangocracy!

  • Suzy61

    I agree with the main thrust of the argument but I really cannot agree that the supporters of Trump in anyway support our staying within the EU.

    The EU is lauded by Obama/Clinton – not Trump.

    • Tony Conrad

      Quite correct.

  • pdxphotoguy84

    It’s called the UNITED STATES of America, dipass…

  • Rick Rus

    Um.

    1. The states are literally, officially referred to, as ‘The States of the Union’.
    2. That Union is over two hundred years old in places.
    3. The differences between them were significant when the mergings happened.
    4. The author is intellectually retarded.

    • Tony Conrad

      They can elect their President. We cannot.

      • colchar

        No, they do not elect their President, the Electoral College does. And the Electoral College is under absolutely no legal nor moral obligation to follow the will of the voters.

        • SocietasDraconistrarumlit1

          The Electoral College is being exploited by mass importation of non assimilating illegal immigrants and now EU vetted “refugees” into states that have the most electoral votes. Unfortunately, very few of the “refugees” qualify as “asylum seekers” under the agreement of 1951. They are mostly economic anarchists looking to exploit the welfare system and vote for politicians that enable them to do it.

          • Tony Conrad

            The means the one’s in Britain will vote for Corbyn no doubt to get their handouts.

        • Mr B J Mann

          Isn’t that how Obama got in!,

          Another reason not to have a USofE!!!

        • Tony Conrad

          So voting counts for nothing. I cannot believe that. One thing is sure you certainly will not get the chance to vote for the EU leaders who are faceless and have their own hidden agenda.

        • Jacque Davis

          Very true colchar. It is all rigged and go the way of the elite. We as United States voters ‘think’ we make a difference. So many are brainwashed by the system that we think that our votes count. They do not. The elite have already picked out who they want on all sides and we just vote in whoever they put into place. It is a win-win for them. But then again, the elite have their hands in all business dealings, politics, academics, etc., in all countries, all over the world, for a VERY long time. My eyes are just starting to open, hopefully the rest of the country and world will stand up for what is best for the majority that live in this world, not for the small group that control it.

    • colchar

      Since when have they been known as ‘The States of the Union’?

  • green hackle

    Just ask yourselves if the Russians, China, N Korea, the Mid East, Could not Give a Toss what America want Why Should we take a Blind bit of Notice what they Want Either, The USA, under that Useless Plank Obama have Become Very unreliable Allies, He has Managed, Single Hand to upset All Americas most trusted Friends, And left them Wondering if they can Trust America in a Time of Need. And the Answer to that One is, We Dont Know..So in the Mean Time Stick Your Advise Obama.

    • colchar

      You might want to take a minute to figure out how capitalization works.

  • Tony Conrad

    Obvously America would never joing something like the EU. They value their sovereignty far too much which we are losing more and more to an unelected quango, who like Nigel Farage we could ask who are you? The people we elect to the EU have no power over this quango which drives us evermore to a European superstate where those in charge are virtual dictators who cannot be dislodged by our voting.

    Had it been a trade deal which it was sold as like that exisiting between Canada and the USA it would have been fine. The reality however is far different. We are looking at a creature in the wings which wants power over as many nations as possible. I say fold it up and start again as nations in co-operation not ruled over by an unelected quango. I like Europe but not as it is under this awful money draining mess. Lets finish with it now while we can so that we can do things like protecting our borders and keep our fishing waters for ourselves etc. not to mention the billions we have to pay daily to help keep the Eurocrats.

    • OmnipotentWizard

      “Obvously America would never joing something like the EU.” Incorrect. The independent states came together and pooled some sovereignty to form the USA. They haven’t looked back since.

      • colchar

        They formed a single, national state. They did not join an international group of states.

        • big

          …..But if they sign TTIP they will be joining the EU and the USA together.If Britain leaves the EU, what would it do about TTIP?

      • Mr B J Mann

        Yes, SOME sovereignty!!!

        • OmnipotentWizard

          A bit like the EU then.

          • Mr B J Mann

            So you admit most national sovereignty has been lost to the bEUrocrats!

            Game, Set & Match to me again!!

          • OmnipotentWizard

            ,,,lost and gained.

          • Mr B J Mann

            You been at the yo-yo dieting again?!

          • OmnipotentWizard

            You haven’t got the hang of these comebacks have you. They need to be telling or funny. Have another go…

          • Mr B J Mann

            You’re projecting more than a multi-screen cinema complex!

          • OmnipotentWizard

            A little better but I can only rate it as C-.

          • Mr B J Mann

            8< – – – – – – –

      • Tony Conrad

        The big difference though is that they can elect their own Presidents. Europe cannot. That is the chief political danger. We have to put up with a faceless quango who are unveiling their political plans little by little when they think we don’t suspect it.

        • OmnipotentWizard

          “We have to put up with a faceless quango who are unveiling their political plans little by little…” Hardly – MEPs are elected.

          • Tony Conrad

            MEPs cannot elect the leaders of Brussels. Please understand and investigate this. This is one of the major flaws of the whole thing.

          • Giambologna

            MEPs in Brussels are largely irrelevant, as they are neither the executive body nor fully legislative, in that they do not initiate legislature. The European Council and Commission are the un-elected, supranational bodies, who sit above the Parliament and our national parliaments.

            The problem with the EU is that it is a supranational body, not an intergovernmental one, and it is key to understand this point. So what Cameron agreed was with other heads of nation states (Merkel, Hollande etc.). This is an intergovernmental agreement. But the EU as the EU is not intergovernmental, this agreement was not ‘legally binding’, because it subjects the EU to a decision two separate parties have made. The EU sits above those national leaders and their elected parliaments, like the European Court of Justice sits above the law courts in each member state country, with ultimate authority over them.

            The EU can initiate and execute policy without any real mandate from the people, but also without any hope of recall from the people.

          • Tony Conrad

            Read this OmnipotentWizard. Giambologna has got it right. Nigel Farage has been saying this for years and is still saying it as are all the UKIP MEPs. If it wasn’t true he would be a laughing stock as he basis an awful lot on it. This is the stark truth. You can say all you like as an MEP but the Commitee makes all the decisions regardless. It is not democratic. You really ought to investigate this properly and not just quote things you might have heard. This is the big weakness of the EU and a very dangerous one in my opinion.

          • OmnipotentWizard

            European Parliament – directly ELECTED. European Council- ELECTED representative of each state. Council of Minister – Assigned by the ELECTED Governments from each state. European Commission – Assigned by the ELECTED Governments from each state.

          • Tony Conrad

            If you studied this properly you would see it. The council is only one of seven bodies in the EU. If you studied them all you would see that the EU is very complicated but not democratic. The complicated nature of it blinds most people who think it is democratic. It most certainly isn’t. The real laws that affect our countries are made by unelected bodies.

        • Giambologna

          No the big difference, is that the countries of Europe have different histories, language, culture and beliefs which make a union superficial and unworkable. In Britain’s case, the size and make-up of our nation proved to be a success for many centuries. A one-size-fits all top down approach to policy making from Brussels, seems to be very inefficient, prone to corruption, and moves political gravity away from the mass of the people and towards a distant elite.

          The US states are a very different matter, and that is why it works.

          • Tony Conrad

            Well said. I can agree with that.

    • big

      You should try reading some American web sites before making statements about what America would do ! I suggest looking at TTIP and TTP many Americans think these so called free trade deals have been a total sell out. We should have left decade’s ago i fear it’s to late the whole world is racing towards the bottom,economically speaking.

  • Stefnix

    You´re so lucky you can decide – in Germany nobody asks us for our opinion. No matter what party you vote for, you´re stuck in this EU mess!

    • http://technomist.co.uk/blog/ Technomist

      Vote AfD. It’s a start.

    • johnb1945

      Then you should start up a German UKIP.
      I personally am pro EU, but the debate in Germany needs an organised Eurosceptic wing.

      I know that many Germans are Eurosceptic, to the extent that they do not want a European superstate. Much the same as Brits.

  • WTF

    One very pertinent point seems to be overlooked in all the articles
    since the weekend and its this, why if the EU is so advantageous to us
    as all the ‘remainiacs’ are claiming, did Cameron try and renegotiate
    our membership conditions. If it was that good a deal he could have
    just had the referendum, won the vote and that would be it, done and
    dusted, but he didn’t !

    Until the ‘remainiacs’ start talking
    specific facts justifying staying in the EU, its best to assume they’re a
    bunch of lying tossers and we should vote out. After Camerons dismal
    performance achieving nothing, at least that’s what it looks like, the
    ball is in heir court to show the electorate why we should stay in the
    EU.

    • mikewaller

      The reason why we are having the referendum is that the Tory party in particular has so many Brexit half-wits, something had to be done to placate them. In fact, anybody with any sense knows that the West has exported so much of its technical expertise that our present exceptional standards of living (by some calculations, over a third of the World’s population still gets by on $2 per day) is unsustainable. Even worse, so many hundreds of millions of people are now piling into towns and cities across the World looking for industrial work, before long we will be in the unprecedented position of having a global productive capacity greatly in excess of any feasible purchasing power [See Robert Pestons excellent “The Great Chinese Crash?” recently shown on BBC2].

      The only possible means of staving off the direst consequence is to remain within a massive trading bloc largely comprising others with comparable living standards. Sadly, that is just the stage at which the tribe of Brexit bozos are jumping up and down saying “We must go it alone”. If you succeed, all I can say is “God help us” as a fully globalised economy will give the congenitally purblind very short shrift!

      • colchar

        You obviously don’t understand that leaving the EU does not mean an end to trade with Europe.

        • mikewaller

          The real question is the basis upon which we trade. Because of our loss of “mojo”, they already sell more to us than we to them, all part of a pattern of decline Churchill recognise decades ago. The underlying factors, when compared with highly successful countries like Germany and Switzerland is that although we have plenty of very able people, to a significantly greater degree than G & S, at the other end of the scale we have a large, under-educated, under-motivated, under-class to whom full globalisation without the additional security of numbers provided by the EU and its more people-orientated philosophy, will bring unmitigated disaster. As the Trump supporters in the USA, the Corbynites here and the other protest parties elsewhere in Europe attest, there is already deep anger amongst those who have found themselves in this group as globalisation increasingly bites. Give that anger the adrenalin boost that would be provided by a go-it-alone UK facing total globalisation full-on, and you are going to have the poll-tax riots on stilts.

          The truth is that for 200 + years folks with white skins have had much higher standards of living than most of the rest of the World because they developed and retained the technologies that underpinned the industrial revolution. Disastrously, in the last 40 years or so, a toxic combination of partly computer-based industrial espionage, the education provided to all comers by Western centres of technical expertise and short-termist, greedy companies exporting manufacturing technologies throughout the World, we no longer enjoy that crucial advantage. Worse, modern media have made clear to the expanding global population how much better lives are in cities at present and this is producing a global industrial workforce whose aggregated productive capabilities will be massively in excess of any conceivable level of global purchasing power. [If you doubt this, have a look at Robert Peston’s excellent “The Great Chinese Crash?” recently shown on BBC2].

          Once it is realised that the scarcest world resource is a job, protectionism will be on the way back in a big way, particularly in the democracies. So ignore all the idiot economists throwing up their hands in horror at the mere suggestion. If you enjoy abnormally high standards of living (as we do) in a world in which you have lost your technological advantage, being within a large trade bloc with others in similar position is the only sensible option. Of course, with any neighbour fool enough to have cut lose just prior to that realisation, the only sensible approach would be to close ranks and let them get on with it.

          • johnb1945

            You call it globalism, I would call it neoliberalism.

            They are de facto the same thing, except you can be be something other than a neoliberal and still maintain a global outlook

          • Tony Conrad

            That’s a very marginal reason for staying in the EU so that we can cover our uneducated part of societyy with some of the EU’s educated class. That’s more reasoning based on fear. On balance not being part of a European superstate has far more benefits. We are not that stupid in this country and can surely make trade deals with whom we want as with other countries. That you can hand everything to an unelected leadership beggars belief. It’s time to get out. It’s true that we need to stand up and pick ourselves up but a hand out culture will not help that whatsoever.

          • mikewaller

            In my view, you are living in dreamland. I am over 70 and all my life folks have being ruing the low level of British productivity, If you don’t believe me, go read Corelli Barnet’s wonderful “The Audit of War” which makes clear that even during WW2, across a range of vital war industries, we were about a third as efficient as the German’s and Americans, a figure that was widely quoted when I was in the electricity supply industry in the 1980s.

            We may have improved somewhat in recent years but it is noteworthy just how much more readily incomers seem to find work that the rump of the indigenous workforce. But even if we have started closing up on the Germans -which I doubt – the bigger picture is frankly terrifying to anybody but an ostrich. Were there to be agreement that the new global entrants to industrialisation would leave all the really clever stuff to us – which, of course, there never would be – it would still leave us with a large element of our population who got on well enough when the West did the great majority of all manufacturing, but now simply cannot cope with competition from very low waged and very hungry guys who have just come in from the paddy-fields.

            As for handing it all to an unelected leadership, it is obvious from the mill that Cameron had to go through that the nation-states still call the shots. Indeed, in the great days of parliamentary sovereignty I never felt that I could rest easy in my bed because 600+ of our wonderful politicians were invariably doing their best for me.

            One other thing, the Brexit-related plan to pull out of the European Courts and replace them with a British Bill of Rights is an act of unspeakable wickedness. Contra our disgusting gutter press, the European courts rarely find against us. The reverse is true of Russia, complainants against whom constitute about 20% of cases. As Amnesty has just pointed out, if we leave, Putin and his pals will think all their Christmases have come at once as they will then be free to go as well. Hard to see that as the achievement of a GREAT Britain! It would be more like that of a petulant child!

          • Mr B J Mann

            Oh, purleeeeze!

            How many times do we ignore UN rulings?!

            The European Court was set up by British lawyers who had to completely restructure and rewrite the Common Law rights and the EXISTING Bill Of Rights to suit the completely incompatible European governmental, legal and policing systems.

            For example in the UK everything is legal unless it is made illegal.

            In Europe everything is illegal unless it is specifically made legal (hence endless rules and regulations).

            In the UK Statute law is exactly what it says on the tin, a judge can’t try to second guess Parliament, or even look at what was debated to interpret meaning, never mind extend a statute’s effect, they can only “decide” what a statute means on legal rules of interpretation if it is unclear.

            On the Continent judges look at, or even guess at, what the lawmakers were trying to achieve with a law, and extend it as far as they see fit.

            In the UK you are innocent until proven guilty.

            Across the Channel you are guilty until proven innocent.

            Over here you can’t be held without good cause and due process.

            Over there they can pick you up off the streets and then look for reasons to keep you under lock and key.

            Hence, for instance, the European Arrest Warrant.

            Previously you couldn’t be held unless the police could show good reason for believing a crime had been committed and you had committed it (that was scrapped by Blair who brought in Uman Rites!

            Now someone can make a false allegation against you in Romania, and the British police will arrest you, and the British Courts agree to your extradition without even ensuring a crime has been committed, never mind that, there is evidence you did it, and as for checking you had any chance of a fair trial…..?!?!?!

            Insisting that we need to swap to EU laws and we’re better off economically is as daft as arguing that Rugby Union clubs should switch to Association Football Rules because they are better and join the Football Leagues as they will be financially better off in them?!?!?!

          • mikewaller

            How much further will you go to make life easier for your pals in Russia?

            Having had the painful experience of being a juror in a Crown Court trial I was appalled at the pantomime the wonderful liberties you extol have enabled lawyers to make of British Justice. For example, the question – asked three times – of a good young witness by some slick city lawyer manage to convert “Yes, that is the man I saw” into “Well, I suppose I could be mistaken.”, at which point, what I will go to my grave convinced was a career criminal, walked free. Some of the issues you raise are valid, particularly the European Arrest Warrant; but I still incline to the view that fine sounding principles like Blackstone’s Formulae: Better that 9 guilty men go free rather than one innocent man be imprisoned really show just how far Lawyers are up their own fundaments. I would be the first to agree that an innocent man or woman being imprisoned is an offence against heaven; but so, too, is allowing appalling exploiters of the vulnerable to get off time after time because of “clever” legal footwork. [My solution to the the specific problem I have identified above is that juries not judges should decide whether the kind of change in evidence evinced by very aggressive cross-examinations is genuine or simply a reaction to unreasonable pressure; but that’s another matter].

            My belief is that we should remain within the wider European system where our contributions are usually well regarded with a hope of (a) continuing to improve their judgements; (b) seeing if there are things in their approaches that could do something about the increasing belief that the Law is just for little people; and (c) not giving Russia, Turkey etc. the golden opportunity they crave to similarly abandon the pan-European notion of human rights.

          • Mr B J Mann

            Have you worked your way right through the bottom of that barrel you’re scraping yet?

            When you’ve finished perhaps you could explain WTF any of that has to do with any of the points at issue?!

            If you can spare the time from continually defaming the Mann instead of playing the ball!

          • mikewaller

            I note that you pick on one line and ignore my substantive points. With regard that one line, you have so steadfastly defended Russia’s diplomatic and military position on another topic, it seems to me fair to characterise you as one of their pals; and in saying that our getting out of the European institutions would be source of joy to President Putin, I am simply giving support to the position taken by Amnesty International, who tend to know about such things. .

          • Mr B J Mann

            I note that you pick on one line and ignore MY substantive points.

            1) You were scraping the barrel.

            2) None of your post had anything to do with any of the points at issue.

            3) You are continually defaming the Mann instead of playing the ball!

            Meanwhile your argument” seems to be to continually accuse me of supporting, steadfastly defended, even “valorising” Putin.:

            “it seems to me fair to characterise you as one of their pals”

            “and in saying that our getting out of the European institutions would be source of joy to President Putin, I am simply giving support to the position taken by Amnesty International, who tend to know about such things.”

            Errrmmmmmmm, where did you mention Amnesty in that post?

            When have Amnesty said that our leaving the EU would “would be source of joy to President Putin”?

            And what on earth would Amnesty know about such things.

            As for, in that post, only supposedly addressing one of your points:

            “For example, the question – asked three times – of a good young witness by some slick city lawyer manage to convert “Yes, that is the man I saw” into “Well, I suppose I could be mistaken.”, at which point, what I will go to my grave convinced was a career criminal, walked free.”

            A juror is supposed to be convinced, ON THE FACTS, not OPINION, of guilt BEYOND reasonable doubt.

            It is well established fact that witnesses are, ermm, unreliable witnesses.

            “I still incline to the view that fine sounding principles like Blackstone’s Formulae: Better that 9 guilty men go free rather than

            one innocent man be imprisoned really show just how far Lawyers are up their own fundaments……”

            The principle isn’t that the guilty should go free, but that those presumed innocent until proven guilty aren’t so labelled except and until it has been proved beyond reasonable doubt.

            Are you really saying you want a world where the 100% clearly innocent “get off”, the 100% definitely guilty get sent down, but those in the murky grey area in the middle, who might or might not be guilty, should be locked up regardless of whether they were guilty or not.

            That they should be found guilty, despite the fact that not even a majority of the jury could be convinced they were guilty, and not even 100% convinced, but only beyond reasonable doubt?!

            “I would be the first to agree that an innocent man or woman being imprisoned is an offence against heaven; but so, too, is allowing appalling exploiters of the vulnerable to get off time after time because of “clever” legal footwork.”

            So how many times was he let off? 5? 10? 50? 100?

            Or are you just assuming, like you were assuming the “witness” was 100% right in his original certitude, and not in his subsequent doubt?!

            “[My solution to the the specific problem I have identified above is that juries not judges should decide whether the kind of change in evidence evinced by very aggressive cross-examinations is genuine or simply a reaction to unreasonable pressure; but that’s another matter].”

            So you decided the guy was guilty because the judge told you to?

            Or you decided he was innocent because the judge told you to?

            Do you know what you are even saying?!

            And you complained I didn’t address every point you made?

            I think I’ve wasted too much time humouring you already!

          • mikewaller

            You really are something else! I mentioned Amnesty International as having criticised the wish by some Britons to leave the European legal institutions as being a boon to Russia because that was what the BBC reported them as having said a couple of days ago. And surely only the most purblind fool would not understand why. In terms of judgements against them by the European Court of Human Rights, two countries really stand out: Russia and Turkey and Russia is the “winner”. The two of them together comprise about 25% of the total. This is an extract from a Guardian article published in 2013:

            ” With more than 20,000 cases pending, Russia is a case apart. “It’s a big country,” says Olga Chernishova, who heads the Russian case-processing division, “with big issues.” Often, perhaps surprisingly, the law itself is not at fault: it’s about the facts: “If someone spends a year in pre-trial detention, in a cell with 15 people, with no running water, no fresh air and no exercise – that’s a violation.” But like officials from most other countries represented here – with the notable exception of Britain – Chernishova acknowledges a “general consensus” in her country, in both the media and among the legal profession, on the value of the court’s judgements Concrete changes in Russian law show the ECHR is making a difference, she says: a compensation system has been introduced for those affected by the non-execution of domestic judgments, a problem that has hurt “perhaps hundreds of thousands of people” in Russia.
            There are new laws on prison overcrowding, and the removal of ubiquitous, daylight-obscuring shutters from prison cell windows. Russian courts are working quantifiably faster than they did 10 years ago; and the supreme court has explained to lower courts the difference between fact and opinion, so fewer journalists get banged up for libel. Most tellingly, Chernishova says, Russian constitutional court rulings now routinely make reference to ECHR judgments: “And you really cannot underestimate the importance, the message sent to ordinary people when justice is finally done in cases – police brutality, for example – that domestic courts have delayed, or failed even to consider.” Inevitably, there are rulings Russia and other countries find somewhat more difficult to accept. As another judge puts it: “Our judgments tend to fall into two categories. It’s either: we don’t question your norms, but your system has malfunctioned. Or it’s: sorry, we can’t accept your norms. States generally accept the first quite readily. They don’t much like the second.”

            It is the last point that Amnesty was so worried about. If we, who in fact very rarely have a finding against us, leave because the sad sacks in Westminster cannot stand the idea of having anybody in sitting in judgement over their patchy efforts, President P and his pals will have a golden opportunity similarly to get out from under. Surely even you can see that?

            As for my courtroom experience, as usual you have got wholly the wrong end of the stick. The trial I witnessed collapsed because a highly paid lawyer used every trick in the book to bring that about. The extended to accused appearing as 13/14 stone man with brown hair when a witness said the felon had been about 11 stone with blond hair, a puzzle that was only resolved when after a lot of legal argument we were shown footage of a disqualified identity parade taken at the time of his arrest when -surprise, surprise – he was about 11 stone and blond haired!.

            What really infuriated me was that – and this is complex, so concentrate – had the case got to the jury-room my judgement and those of my fellow jurors would have been paramount as to what had actually happened with regard an event which had we witnessed it would have disqualified us from being jurors. However, that never happened because an event that we did actually witness – the brow-beating of a much younger man by a very experienced advocate – was not left to us to evaluate, but simply treated by the judge as a run of the mill technical knock out. Contemptible!

          • Mr B J Mann

            Riiiiiight, so we shouldn’t leave the EU because nasty Russia and nasty Turkey are in the ECHR, end the EU makes us extradite citizens to countries with even worse legal protection than Britain and that makes it OK to destroy Syria?!?!?!

          • Tony Conrad

            Extremely good and important points Mr Mann. We sleepwalk blindly more and more into the EU at our peril

          • Tony Conrad

            You may have a point about low British productivity, probably due to the over cushioning we have in this country. However, I do not see that as a reason to stay in the EU which costs us billions. We can surely make our own trade deals rather than being ruled by Brussels. Europe exports much more to us than we to them. I can’t see them giving that up just because we are not part of the EU. The growing economies are all somewhere else like India, China and Malaysia. That we are forbidden to make trade deals with them by the EU must hamper our economy a lot. Many thinking people are beginning to see that out is the only option. You are wrong about democracy. Member countries have no power to elect who rules the EU. You have no say and you cannot alter it as it is not democratic. A very dangerous situation indeed.

          • mikewaller

            Is not global success of Mercedes-Benz, Audi, & VW ever so slightly suggestive that rather than being prohibited from trading with these countries, the real problem is that we do not trade effectively? I am reading the latest book from Bill Bryson in the course of which he states that when he was born in 1951 the UK was producing over 40% of the world’s manufactured goods; and now that’s down to 2/3%. Even the fact that we import far more from the EU than we export can be read the same way i.e. even when the playing field is relatively level, we lose out.

            Why against this background anybody should think that if we go it alone against economies whose cost bases are a fraction of ours, I am at a complete loss to understand. As for who rules the the EU, the answer is obvious the elected heads of the individual States. The real democratic deficit in Europe is the relative powerlessness of the European Parliament which has been sacrificed to ensure the primacy of the nation states.

            All that said, where I do have sympathy with those wish to leave is on the question of free movement of labour. If the EU continues to expand Eastwards, there will be millions of people whose personal interests would favour moving West. Against this background, I think Cameron has made a monumental boo-boo by going for a short sharp referendum. What he should have been doing is going over the heads of the current leaders in Europe to build upon the great anxieties on this point so recently acerbated by the refugee crisis, amongst most Europeans. Then he might have had something really worthwhile to offer us. ,

          • Tony Conrad

            Manufacturing has virtualyl ceased in the UK as we can buy it cheaper from India or China. I used to buy a lot of parts from them but ultimately they went into a bigger creation disigned in Britain and sold all over the world. I give you the point that British productivity has reached a low mainly because of the cost but the brains of the country are still in great demand in many fields including Banking, Architecture, Technology etc. etc.

          • hobspawn

            Just barmy.

          • mikewaller

            ‘spect the sand feels all nice and warm round your little beak!

          • Tony Conrad

            It is not just about technology but about order and fair laws. This affects the economy as well. Basically it is people who create their environment with their dreams,desire for fair play etc. etc. In many of the third world countries you will see unfair political systems and opression of the poor by rulers and the rich. Technology can be used for good or ill.

      • WTF

        Cameron has a majority in the house so why does he have to placate them when he has never done so on any other group before ! Doesn’t wash as a reason, sorry !

        • mikewaller

          Don’t be daft! The split over Europe has been threatening to destroy the Tory party for about 30 years. As with Peel and the Corn Laws, he might be able to push specific legislation through with the support of other parties, but he would be out as Tory leader and the split (again as with Peel) would take decades to heal.

          • Tony Conrad

            He already split a lot of voters with his Gay marriage bill. Clinging to a socialist EU is just another earthquake. He was fortunate to get a landslide, which came about as people feared a deal between Labour and the Leftish SNP which would have been a sellout of England. That would have been a catastrophe and hence the tory vote. Even a lot of UKIP who feared the same voted tory. With the referendum we now have a magnificent chance of letting our feelings be known but be aware Cameron is trying hard to gag Britex tory supporters and government money can only be spent on pro EU (note that I do not say Europe) endeavours.

      • Tony Conrad

        A very narrow view if I may say so. India and China’s economy are growing far more than Europe’s. European contries still trade with China, India and whomsoever. Can’t see that your theories hold any water. You are prepared to give up freedom for something that isn’t there. Europe’s economy is declining as a whole. Norway and Switzerland thrive outside of the EU. The world is a smaller place and one can have trade deals with anyone. Your fears are unfounded.

    • Tony Conrad

      I think Cameron is scared to lead this country as he hasn’t got what it takes. Far easier to shelter under the EU and blame them when things go wrong. We need to stop the rot now.

    • johnb1945

      Because if “Stay” win (which they will) Cameron has a mandate to forge ahead within Europe, and his Eurosceptic party colleagues have received an unequivocal instruction from the public to “sit down”.

      This is why we are having a referendum.

  • evad666

    The PM says our security is improved by being in. Is this to maintain the status quo which facilitated the Paris attacks?

    Improving food quality? http://www.euractiv.com/section/agriculture-food/news/ombudsman-criticises-commissions-handling-of-pesticides/

    Improving security, sharing data? http://www.euractiv.com/section/global-europe/news/eu-rules-prevent-sharing-of-refugee-fingerprints/

    • Tony Conrad

      Very good points.

  • http://technomist.co.uk/blog/ Technomist

    Matt Ridley. As acute as ever. Good article.

  • trobrianders

    UK has been emasculated by leftist indoctrination. Americans actually value their liberty.

  • johnb1945

    The USA does not need to join something like the EU because it already is what the federalisers in the EU seek to become – a Union of economically, legally and politically integrated countries – i.e. the United States.

    It has a roughly similar sized internal market to the EU, similar land mass, similar living standards.

    The one difference between the EU and the US is that the US was forged from countries which already had a dominant Anglo-Saxon culture, a common language, the common law (louisiana excepted) etc. etc.

    • Mr B J Mann

      Does the Federal Government tell the States what their local sales taxes should be?!

      • WTF

        No, Sales tax can vary from 0% in Montana to the highest rates of nearly 9% in California or New York. In addition New York has a local income tax as well.

    • Giambologna

      ‘The one difference’ – surely this is many, massive differences. The countries of the EU were independent nations for many centuries before artificially joining together, and had developed very different cultures and beliefs. The states of the US, in contrast, were not.

    • KittyR

      Yes, but the ‘countries’ you mention that joined to become the US weren’t countries at all – they were British colonies that joined together in a Congress, which rebelled against the British Crown and became a nation. The US is a nation state, the EU is most certainly not. Please do not compare the history of a nation state like the US with the 500+ million of us poor souls here in Europe, each a different nation state, with different legal systems, languages, millennia of history, cultures, who suddenly find ourselves part of a political, judicial, economic and legal union we never voted for or wanted. As you note, the US was formed from a unified colonialist culture from the same country, sharing a common language, and most importantly they wanted so much to form a blinkin’ union and nation state they were prepared to fight to the death for it. Europeans do not want to be one great country, so please don’t feel free to use this analogy ever again, thank you very much. The EU is far closer in practice to the USSR.

      • johnb1945

        If you read my post, then why would you imagine that I disagree with you and need to have this pointed out?

  • johnb1945

    The question isn’t “why doesn’t the US join something like the EU”, but “What would we think if one of the US constituent countries – e.g. California – announced a referendum on leaving the US?”

    • SocietasDraconistrarumlit1

      Actually… Most of us hope that California breaks off, falls into the ocean, and takes all the ostrich voters, crooked politicians and illegals with it.

      The next earthquake could make it so, you never know.

      • johnb1945

        What about all the valley girls?

        • SocietasDraconistrarumlit1

          Well… Most of them would float with their implanted flotation devices and could be rescued.

          • johnb1945

            I know, but they are great.

          • SocietasDraconistrarumlit1

            A small price to pay for freedom…LOL

      • WTF

        Yep, a bad choice as an example as most of America is just waiting for this state to slip into the Pacific !

  • The Masked Marvel

    “America” or Obama, Kerry, and the authoritarian Left who are in charge for the moment? Lazy conflation.

    • WillG

      It’s a reasonable shorthand to conflate the term “America” with the current US government. Anything else is hypothetical

  • Watt

    Good point Matt. Not that anyone listens to Americans anyway

  • KittyR

    Brilliant article. So true. I find it laughable that people compare the EU to the US when the EU’s more accurately compared to the USSR. Your average Jo America would never, ever put up with foreign judges dictating as final arbiters of federal law in the Supreme Court, or being pressurized to take in Mexican migrants, or bail out failed Central American states. Like the Americans Matt Ridley mentions, I fear many Brits are under the impression the EU is a a nice culture club with a bit of a trade agreement and a few ‘rules’ about sharing out asylum seekers thrown in and are sleepwalking into having their democratic rights increasingly eroded.

    • Tony Conrad

      Good points.

      • KittyR

        Thank you!

  • Stuart Britton

    The USA is by it’s very name, and nature, much like the EU itself. An experiment started nearly 250 years ago. It has proven successful on many levels, certainly economically, but is in many other ways an utter failure, and in particular in terms of it’s social welfare, or rather lack of it. If they would take social, and in house humanitarian issues seriously, they truly might be the greatest conglomerate nation on earth. Would they join an EU like set-up? No. They already are one.

    • Tony Conrad

      EU is nothing like the USA. They elect their Goverment. We cannot elect the EU Goverment. Even the MEP don’t rule. Just ask Nigel Farage who is one.

      • Stuart Britton

        We elect our EU representatives. The US elects it’s state representatives. Our democratically elected heads of state elect the Eu president. It’s not identical, of course, but it’s not dissimilar. It really isn’t.

        • Tom M

          The very big difference between the US and the EU is that the US was created by immigrants in a country where there was no individual State with a long history and culture to overcome.
          Us here in the EU have some 2000 years of deep rooted culture, prejudices and downright loathing to overcome before beginning to even look like a State.
          Interestingly the USA has always been a democratic organisation from the start and the States all evolved together. Quite a few countries, now in the EU, are only very recently democratic. Looking like a democracy can happen at the will of a Government however it takes a long long time to act like a one.

          • Stuart Britton

            I do hear what you’re saying, and agree on the whole. That said, I doubt that the native American Indians would have agreed that there was no history or culture to overcome. I was being somewhat hyperbolic in my original comment, although the basics of the statement do still stand I believe. I would wager also that the the deep South black population would very much disagree with the idea that all the States evolved together, and that democracy is very much subjective, even now. Perhaps especially now, in light of current political events.

        • Tony Conrad

          You don’t elect any of the four presidents of the EU of which there are four. President of the European Parliament, President of the Europen Council, President of the European Commission and President of the Council of the EU. Your direct voting only affects MEP’s who in turn elect the President of the European Parliament. It has no effect on the other three presidents whose departments have a lot of say in where the EU is going. At present socialism rules in the EU and as I see it does not serve the interests of the UK and is not working. In the USA the party puts forward the presidential candidate who you can vote for. Over there president means President. In the EU it doesn’t mean the same thing. You can only elect the MEP’s who in turn elect the president of the parliament only and not any of the other three presidents in the EU. In that system it is very difficult to sort out curruption and expense misuses of which there are many. We thought we were signing a trade deal not a gargantum which wants to take over literally everything.

  • gillardgone

    Never Surender ourselves to servitude and Shame “Winston Churchill ” Brexit.

  • tomncali

    we are already being forced into this mess yet none in office are honest enough to straight point it out. those who do not think so only have to look to immigration,it is hurting us and in no way good for citizens yet we have no say of the 1,5 million of more dumped on us. then look at illegal immigration,nothing is done to stop it nor is anything done when they are caught. trump has brought this out yet the blind still cannot see it.

    even as the dump drugs and commit very bad crimes against citizens our gov does next to nothing to stop it,showing they fully support it.

    • tomncali

      to add the USA will be completely ruined do to the countries to our south are so crime and poverty stricken our best bet would be to block them off to keep their throw away’s out. we cannot nor should we even think of opening our borders like the present addm is forcing on us, millions out of work yet they crap on citizens even more by dumping unneeded peoples who will never contribute unless you see slums ghettos and barrios as a good thing.

  • Steve

    I’m probably gonna vote for Brexit but I feel like one way or another the vote will be lost. The EU ignored 3 different member state’s vetos of further state-building, told the Irish to try again (and probably fixed the outcome), and in all other cases just went ahead with the Lisbon Treaty in all but name anyway.

    The EU elite simply don’t care about democracy or the wants and needs of the member-states public. Union and everything else be damned.

  • Chun Jiuqien

    pdf版(*^ヮ゚)σ:http://www.geocities.co.jp/WallStreet/7659/sjp/statements/sjp20160526.html
    Don’t Britons know DIVIDE and CONQURE?
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    United Kingdom must never independent from European Union!

    United Kingdom independence movement…
    Isn’t Russia in back of this movement?

    Don’t Britons know?
    Britannia doesn’t rule the waves any more.
    Britannia strayed from the crowds shall be eaten by the bear♪

    Doesn’t rule Britannia!
    Britannia doesn’t rule the waves♪
    Britons must, must, must shall be slaves♪

    United Kingdom must never independent from European Union!

    pdf版(*^ヮ゚)σ:http://www.geocities.co.jp/WallStreet/7659/sjp/statements/sjp20160526.html

    m9(゚∀゚)Идиот!> номенклату́ра
    נומנקלטורה עמלק
    Ceterum autem censeo, Nomenklaturam esse delendam.

  • Ben Reedy

    Seattle and Tegucigalpa eh? Manchester and Athens? Convenient for the author to pretend that every country in the EU is as poor as Greece. I suppose it is the only way to pitch the false analogy. Let’s forget about Germany, France, Finland, Sweden, Norway, Austria, Belgium, Netherlands, Poland, Denmark. Even better, let’s pretend that these countries compare directly to Nicaragua and Brazil. There are reasons perhaps, but I didn’t expect the author to ride non-nonsensical sensationalism all the way to the end of the article.

  • Maiden Voyage

    Very well put, Mr. Ridley. I would just say that Kerry and his cohorts are doing all they can to “unite your own continent into a superstate” and often via that NATO of which you speak (North Atlantic Treaty Organization). NATO is ‘just’ a treaty because the electorate here has a lot of individualism and ‘cowboy’ in them still but make no mistake, it is a step in the direction of control over the country rather than rule by a sovereign people as our Constitution demands. This is why ‘they’ want the masses to think of our supreme law (Constitution) as a ‘living’ thing that changes (or should change). It is less changeable than the speed limit or any other less superior law but ‘they’ have an agenda. The EU and NATO are quite on the same tract, make no mistake. The wonderful thing is, we individuals can take a stand together, the sooner the more peaceful. Please do, I pray, rid yourselves of the evil scourge, as we must as well. Once done, we must always remain vigilante, that’s the rub. In this world we can see that absolute power breeds an agenda of to take over the world and keep the masses enslaved. We can look at it as evil v good rather than us against you or we people against another nation. I stand with you, we are in this together.

Close
Can't find your Web ID? Click here