If you let a side have a vote, then pretend they are racists, I'm equally worried about the racist and the "anti"-racists.
Insofar as real racists are concerned, they are very basic at large. Predictably they will cause havoc if things turn worse.
Even if you have the right idea, accepting media guidance and resorting to not seeking out people with whom you disagree is dangerous.
So when one set of dumb people write of the other, it doesn't matter who is dumber anymore, its just an issue for everyone else, and assigning blame becomes an exercise for whoever reigns victorious at the end of it.
Norway is in the EU economic zone, but not in the EU. And policy was set in stone long before we joined the economic zone.
We could afford not to join, and we don't allow immigration. We are failing with the immigration we have, we aren't small enough to turn an Iceland and just refuse to own the problems foreign interest would cause, and we aren't big enough to have any influence, but at-least we aren't in a position where we cant afford to leave the EU.
We could ask to join because we have oil and fish, but that would be naïve, also, those are the kind of benefits you can sell on a market, that is what a market is.
Modern Britain, after losing the colonies, was shaped by Thatcher, that is something that didn't work. I think even the people who thought it might, are now on the pendulum back to whatever isn't knowingly non-functional, even if it means ripping away some supporting structure.
I think that is the smart people, plus the agreed consensus, and that one-issue policy wont sway the people that have been around a while.
Yes Thatcher was against the EU, but then Britain found itself in the same policy, only now replacing sovereignty for promise. The country isn't run into the ground, but the premise of leaving, means maybe that. After that there is no special or foreign interest in anything, because its worse than what everyone else "has".
Scotland thought it could be the thing that leached off EU, on the back of England. Turns out their sovereignty would cost them that. Now that the part that is decidedly not Scotland, is out of the EU, Scotland wont be able to join on the same terms. And they wont even get to have a say about it.
So Scotland could leave the UK, but its not the same EU-deal at the end of it. So Scotland will threaten to leave the UK to get more of a say in it, kinda like England did prior to leaving the EU.
So the stability may come when the EU realizes France isn't big on being at the losing end of a deal. Its all fun and games when its going well, but then, they are all alone with the problems they have.
So the EU could accept member countries on more equal terms, but that will never happen, because that isn't what the EU is.
The EU is running into the problems they created, and have not surprisingly, no real plan to fix it. Border control is thought to be for all people in it, but that doesn't work when you start letting in people without passports. Work-immigration isn't what the states that get it want, and there are no basic labour jobs left for people who aren't educated. The common currency has turned a blind eye to corruption, because it pays. Now the national state is back, because someone has to pay. Then austerity doesn't exactly work. Its the polar opposite to corruption, with the same non-real economy to show for it.
You can sell infrastructure to foreign interest to "fix things", a lot of security actually will seemingly fix the economy, but if you look at how it all operates, and who it matters to, its a lot harder to build these securities.
Securities like unions can be problematic, social security equally so, but matters efficiency see to it that they are self-collapsing.
Its a game of filling up your glass, then dripping it into a bowl of common water among states, whoever has enough water to come up with the idea, has water left at the end of it, which is the crucial difference. You can use that to win big, but you can never not go broke with it.
Some countries have just hacked this process, making the ties backwards stronger than what is a symbiotic relationship, which only happens when you are either powerful in a military sense, or are too big to fail.
The people actually in the EU are very few, and they are huge, everyone else slightly apprehensive about increasing the speed at which the fan operates, knowing the shit will hit it, sooner or later.
Having your own agriculture is sometimes the only idea that matters.
The EU collaboration is, and has been at that stage even collectively, for a long time, with respect to describing the fan, its operation can not be denied. Not everyone can just pension-out in Brussels and live on arrogance.
When was the last time something was corrupt and it didn't benefit someone? It is not down to incompetence, and it sure isn't manageable greed.
Asking for justice of something intent to bring down the national state, is quite feign.
