Brexit

ostap bender wrote:makedonija moze sutra da bukne i da povuce grcku sa sobom

Kinder Lad wrote:neodgovorno i naivno.

ostap bender wrote:...

nego kouvelakis

http://www.versobooks.com/blogs/2726-the-eu-can-t-be-reformed

The EU cannot be reformed and I think there is no other solution but to dissolve it.

A true refoundation of Europe would mean breaking the iron cage of perpetual austerity and authoritarian neoliberalism. To get there we need a rupture with the institutional machinery of the EU. So we have to play the referendum game, while blocking the forces of the xenophobic and nationalist Right from winning hegemony and diverting the popular revolt.

Nigel Farage, leader of the nationalist and xenophobic UKIP, made interventions in the European Parliament in which he accused the EU of behaving in a dictatorial manner toward Greece. He said things that the whole British and European Left should have said.

Michael Von Freising

24. јун ·

 

EU Referendum Local Results 2016 vs. Mad Cow Disease Outbreak Areas 1992

However, it would be a mistake to jump to conclusions.

Kinder Lad wrote:neodgovorno i naivno. EU moze da se razbije samo po nacionalnim granicama, a tada good luck to Left with taking initiative. Akcije levice jeste potrebna, ali ne na razbijanju EU.

паће wrote:

Kinder Lad wrote:neodgovorno i naivno. EU moze da se razbije samo po nacionalnim granicama, a tada good luck to Left with taking initiative. Akcije levice jeste potrebna, ali ne na razbijanju EU.

Не разбити. Опрати се не може, треба правити нову. С тим што би је требало правити на сасвим новим основама. Нпр свеевропски споразум о слободном кретању свега, од Гибралтара до Урала а не да се прави богаташко друштво у ћошку.

паће wrote:

Kinder Lad wrote:neodgovorno i naivno. EU moze da se razbije samo po nacionalnim granicama, a tada good luck to Left with taking initiative. Akcije levice jeste potrebna, ali ne na razbijanju EU.

Не разбити. Опрати се не може, треба правити нову. С тим што би је требало правити на сасвим новим основама. Нпр свеевропски споразум о слободном кретању свега, од Гибралтара до Урала а не да се прави богаташко друштво у ћошку.

...
To understand why Brexit is such good news we must look not at the lies of the leave camp but at the arguments of remain. They consist essentially of two claims. The first is that leaving would only make things worse – what leave rightly derided as “Project Fear”. Second is remain’s promise that the EU would never be more than a market. Fears over the loss of sovereignty were misguided, remain argued, since the UK would block and veto any future moves in that direction.
...
Had remain won the referendum, the EU would have become hostage to British sabotage. Future British prime ministers would veto any fundamental change involving the transfer of sovereignty, arguing, correctly, that their people had voted only for the current set-up of the EU. Britain would continue to demand ever more opt-outs and concessions – playing to the fantasy that membership is a British favour to the rest of Europe.
...
Which brings us to remain’s conception of the EU as merely “a market”. This is a disastrous view. Markets are never neutral arrangements but always political constructs. Consider whether you allow pharmaceutical companies to market antidepressants directly to consumers, as in the US, or not – as in Europe. Both are “markets”, but the difference in impact on society is profound. Think of environmental standards, genetically modified organisms, anti-trust law (when is a market an oligopoly?), privacy or priorities in enforcement of intellectual property violations. Then there is the question of what should be a market in the first place: education, health, the prison system?

Leaving these decisions to European technocrats means that we effectively hand over control of our society to the corporate lobbies that have direct access to those technocrats. These days global banks and other multinationals operate on a European level while politics still take place on a national level. The consequence is that big corporations can play off one European country against the other in a regulatory race to the bottom, demanding ever lower if not downright homeopathic tax rates.

Is this the EU we want? Or do we build a strong and democratically legitimate countervailing power that can operate on the same European level as the corporate lobby? If the latter, we need to construct a vibrant pan-European political space with real debate and real powers. It is crazy that Europeans have their own court, parliament and currency, but no pan-European public forum to debate what to do with these instruments.

Perhaps the construction of a European demos of this kind is all too much, all too fast. What is clear is that the current EU is corporate and undemocratic and the eurozone is a disaster. Europeans can throw in the towel, dismantle the whole thing and retreat to their powerless little countries. Or they can make a final attempt to make the European project work.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jun/28/brexit-great-news-eu-britain-sovereignty

The Leave campaign’s stunning upset has barely sunk in and already the pundits are flogging a familiar storyline. Those ‘left behind’ in the hard-luck provinces have punched privileged, corporate London in the nose.
The facts tell a different story: culture and personality, not material circumstances, separate Leave and Remain voters. This is not a class conflict so much as a values divide that cuts across lines of age, income, education and even party. A nice way to show this is to examine the relationship between so-called ‘authoritarianism’ questions such as whether children should obey or the death penalty is appropriate, and support for the EU.

Djamolidine Abdoujaparov wrote:

The Leave campaign’s stunning upset has barely sunk in and already the pundits are flogging a familiar storyline. Those ‘left behind’ in the hard-luck provinces have punched privileged, corporate London in the nose.
The facts tell a different story: culture and personality, not material circumstances, separate Leave and Remain voters. This is not a class conflict so much as a values divide that cuts across lines of age, income, education and even party. A nice way to show this is to examine the relationship between so-called ‘authoritarianism’ questions such as whether children should obey or the death penalty is appropriate, and support for the EU.

Brexit Voters: NOT the Left Behind

meni se ovo sviđa jer objašnjava sličnost sa Tramparom a istovremeno omogućuje da se pokaže da je teza o "dva populizma" (Trampov i Berijev, Leave i Korbinov, itd.) potpuni bulšit.

Genes, strict parenting and straitened circumstances contribute to people’s aversion to difference, which gets wired into their personality. For Karen Stenner, this makes authoritarians resistant to exhortations to embrace diversity. Younger, wealthier and better educated people, and women, are a bit less oriented toward order and intolerance.
...
As large-scale migration challenges the demographic sway of white majorities, the gap between whites who embrace change and those who resist it is emerging as the key political cleavage across the west. Compared to this cultural chasm, material differences between haves and have nots, managers and workers, are much less important.

otto katz wrote:Koji potezi su na raspolaganju EU da isprovocira aktivaciju člana 50, ako Angličani preuzmu taktiku odugovlačenja?