animist wrote: Nick wrote:
animist wrote:a couple of relevant differences. Norway and Switzerland are members of the Single Market, while Britain avows to leave it. More relevant still, neither of these countries, unlike Britain, has turned its back on Europe in a nativist referendum fostered by true Brit hatred of this institution (while the true Brit government is trying to maintain the benefits).
Neither Norway nor Switzerland were ever really facing the EU, were they? Both have had referenda concerning further integration with the EU, and both rejected the EU. Switzerland also had a referendum which has led to the restriction of free movement. There is discussion in Norway about leaving the EEA and recent polls show around 70% against joining the EU. Why? For exactly the same reasons as the UK. So I don't see why the relationship should be any different.
you make no sense at all. Whatever does your first sentence mean?
No sense, animist? I was just referring to your post, "turning its back". My point being that it is difficult to turn ones back if you already have one's back facing in that way. Clumsy, maybe, but that was what I intended.
Discussion is not action,
It's an indication of movement in sentiment, though, which must preceded any action.
and you should not argue from possibilities to realities like the dumb Brexit policy being pursued by people who know not much more than the hoi polloi - see Ian Dunt's recent blog, posted by me.
There's idiocy in all sorts of areas, not least in some of Dunt's blogs! I'd recommend you don't base your views on his!
Anyway, since I seem to have to repeat myself, the crucial difference is the other two are in the SM and Britain will soon not be
..except that you said turning their back on Europe was more important...
And to repeat myself too, the single market does not exist for services, some 80% or so of the economy, so is rather less relevant than you appear to be claiming.
Some grounds for spite on the EU's part, I would say;
The UK didn't show spite towards mainland Europe, though heaven knows we were provoked enough! Shame shame shame on the EU for even thinking of it! Grrr!!
If you bothered to soil your hands by looking at Leaver forums like Guido Fawkes you would see a mass of spite and hatred which might bother even you.[/quote]Oh, certainly, but they are not themselves negotiating Brexit, are they? Unlike Barnier, who is.
How were we provoked?
The invasion of Poland and other such provocations...
We have been allowed several exemptions and concessions already.
Tank goodness! Now why is the EU so determined not to allow anyone else to adopt such exemptions? It's a ratchet effect, it only goes one way. And given the seeming determination ( of Macron in particular) to push the Project even further, in spite of opposition throughout Europe, I wonder how long the UK would have been allowed to continue, and to resist further destructive integration.
Anyway, give me some concrete examples of irrefutable "spite" emanating from the EU - and I do not count warnings that Britain will suffer by leaving the Single Market as "spite".
Well I do! Other examples? Refusing to discuss anything before money, while threatening a "no deal" just because "the clock is ticking". How does that help anyone? Anyone at all?
Look, I don't know anything much about this Galileo project, and the EU may change its mind, since its own plans may be damaged by Britain's exclusion. I know you will not see it this way, but to me it is just one of the myriad ways in which Brexit is destroying what were mutually beneficial arrangements - and the EU is not responsible for Brexit.
Galileo didn't start out as an EU project, nor is there any reason why it should be so exclusive. If Russia and the USA can share the Space Station, then the UK can be part of Galileo. Let's hope the EU sees sense. I have my doubts, though...
but grounds (ie motive) are not evidence of actual thinking.
But actual actions and speeches demonstrate spite, don't they?
what I mean is that interpreting others' speech and behaviour is largely subjective and depends on one's own prejudices; thus you interpret every action or speech of EU ministers defending their own interests as bullying or spite, whereas I don't
That's it! EU ministers are defending the institutions of the EU, not the people of Europe! Just ask the Greeks!
There is now clearly a well-deserved lack of trust, in such a sensitive area, on the part of the EU, of this country - just read what the EU says. What a tragedy
So the EU feels hurt. Time for it to pull up its big-boy pants and get on with life, instead of throwing its weight around like a playground bully. The UK feels it is being ruled from abroad. But the UK is not threatening to punish the EU, is it? A tragedy indeed.
did you read the reason for this proposed exclusion? It expressed concern about the security aspects of parts of the Galileo project.
Clearly ridiculous. We are a mainstay of NATO and perhaps Europe's leading intelligence nation, and we share that with our allies. Leaving the EU won't suddenly mean we are any more (or less) untrustworthy.
And if you believe that the UK never threatens to punish the EU, what about Rees-Mogg's threat to ruin the Irish beef industry?
Well, IIRC, JR-M was explaining why tariffs would also hurt Ireland, in just the same way as Remoaners have threatened the ruin of British agricuture. But more crucially, JR-M is not part of the negotiations is he? Unlike Barnier and his ticking clock.