Pro and against Eu arguments

• Europatriotism is patriotism for Europe

  Monday, May 22, 2006 at 6:32 AM PDT

  Europatriotism is patriotism for Europe, and comes from the portmanteau of the two words.

  Europatriotism is not a well defined term, and whilst some understand it to mean patriotism for and about Europe, its common ideals, heritage and similar notions (themselves open to debate), many see Europatriotism defined as patriotism for and about the European Union. Such EU patriotism is generally not patriotism for the EU institutions and organisation, but patriotism for a vision of the peoples of the EU identifying themselves first with the EU as a nation-state-to-be (or similar supranational body) as opposed to peoples first or sole patiotism being towards the EU member state of which they are a citizen. Many also hold a vision for the EU to in the future encompass all of Europe, so therefore patriotism for a vision or forging of a nation-state-like EU might also be said to be patriotism for all of Europe, encompassed in an enlarged EU, in some peoples vision. There are many strains of Europatriotism.

  Similar, but less strong sorts of patriotism exists in Africa and South America (see the African Union and Mercosur). There is debate as to whether this term should be defined in respect of the continent of Europe, the international organisation of the EU, or in respect of the concept of “European unity”.

  Because patriotism is seen as a requirement for a healthy democracy, the European Union is slowly adopting a policy to encourage and incite Europatriotism. The most used method to incite Europatriotism is to encourage pan-European projects such as Airbus and Galileo. See the list of European projects. To other countries it’s like supporting both your local area and country at the same time, i.e. Texan and American, Ontarian and Canadian, Queenslander and Australian, Scots and British; and Macanese and Chinese. Europatriotism is in its very early stages, but the notion of emerging Europatriotism in Europe is clear[1].

  The basic concept of ‘Europatriotism’ lies in two post-World War II speeches by Winston Churchill:

  “Why should there not be a European Group which could give a sense of enlarged patriotism?”

  —Winston Churchill in Zürich, 19 September 1946
  
  “We hope to see a Europe where men of every country will think as much of being a European as of belonging to their native land, and that without losing any of their love and loyalty of their birthplace. We hope wherever they go in this wide domain, to which we set no limits in the European Continent, they will truly feel ‘Here I am at home. I am a citizen of this country too.’”
  
  —Winston Churchill in Amsterdam, Dam Square, 9 May 1948

  To put Churchills quotes into context, it should be noted, however, that Churchill was using “European” in a common UK sense – meaning continental Europe – and that he was describing mechanisms that might avoid future wars. [1]. Indeed he never suggested a greater European identity covering the continent – the Soviet Union and their European empire, and the British Commonwealth were not a part of Churchills European vision.

  View Post (0) Comments

• Pro EU arguments why all european countries should join EU

  Monday, May 22, 2006 at 6:31 AM PDT

  The EU has banned animal testing for making cosmetics and laid down rules for labelling all consumer goods so you always know exactly what you are buying.

  As a consumer, you are protected by some basic laws that apply no matter what EU country you are in. For example, EU rules say that all ingredients have to be listed on the label on the products you buy. In 2003 European leaders decided to stop animal testing for cosmetics.

  The EU has helped more than 2 million young people to study in another country.

  Going abroad to learn is popular. The EU schemes for educational exchange and trans-border partnerships such as Erasmus, Leonardo, and Socrates are well-known names. Read more.

  The EU has made Europe the world leader in using and making mobile phones, thanks to its common technical standards.

  The EU is active in helping researchers from different countries work together. Among the results are the Airbus aircraft and the many European mobile phones, which has been a success with industry and consumers thanks to the common European technical standard called GSM.

  The EU is the biggest donor of aid for development around the world.

  The EU gives more in development aid and humanitarian assistance than other rich countries do. The EU also works for trade rules that are fair for poorer countries.

  The EU has ensured that there has been no war between its members for last 60 years.

  The EU rose from the ashes of World War II. It was set up to end the old hostilities that led to wars and to create prosperity through cooperation among all Europeans. Read about the purpose and history of the EU in “Europe in 12 lessons”.

  EU regional aid has raised living standards in the poor regions in Europe.

  One third of the EU’s € 100-billion-a-year budget is used to stimulate the economy, to create jobs in disadvantaged regions and to provide training for unemployed or underqualified people. People in regions of Ireland and Spain, for example, are much better off than they were 20 years ago. Read more.

  The EU allows you to travel, live and work in any EU-country, in most cases without border controls or paperwork.

  The EU is constantly working to get rid of unnecessary borders and barriers. Read more about your rights to live and work abroad – or just to travel and shop for pleasure.

  The EU is leading the “Kyoto” drive to reduce the air pollution that causes global warming.

  People in Europe are very environmentally conscious. So the EU is spearheading world efforts to preserve the environment and promote sustainable development. In recent years it has been important to get as many countries in the world as possible to take actions to avoid climate changes as agreed in the “Kyoto Protocol” – like Europeans do themselves.

  The EU has implemented a clear-cut rule that men and women must have equal pay for equal work.

  As long ago as the 1950s, the first EU treaties contained a clear rule that men and women must have equal pay for equal work. This has given the EU a pioneering role in the fight for women’s rights , which are now an integral part of all EU policies.

  The EU has slashed the price of telephone calls and air tickets, because the single market and a common currency reduce prices and increase choice.

  The EU is a “single market”, where competition drives prices down and quality up. The EU has created the euro which is used in 12 countries. The euro gives stability for business and make it easier to compare price.

  View Post (0) Comments

• Pan-European culture and identity

  Monday, May 22, 2006 at 6:31 AM PDT

  Europatriotism is closely related to a stronger sense of a European identity being developed through a more intermixed contemporary pan-European culture. A few examples of contemporary pan-European culture.

  * Eurodance and electronice dance music. House, trance, techno and such, plus europop. This is a European theme with very limited uptake – only a small minority of younger people.
  * Eurofood: In recent years the ethnic Turkish in Europe, have successfully hooked up every single European country with a new national (and thus pan-European) favourite snack dish, the kebab. Where the Mexicans provided the United States with burritos, the “Euro-Turks” has provided the Europeans with the döner kebab, created by Turks in Berlin’s suburb Kreuzberg. It is worth noting however, that there has recently been a spreading around the world of different cuisines – for example, the recent rise in prominence of Thai cuisine in many nations – therefore the fact that Turkish food is more available in Europe of late could be said to have more to do with certain European countries political histories – Germany has traditionally had Turkey as a main provider of immigrant labour. Similarly, north African food is common in many French cities, and Indian food is said to provide the UKs favourite dishes. The availability of kebabs in the UK has more to do with immigration from Cyprus (which was a UK crown colony) than a sense of European identity. Therefore there is limited evidence of food providing any sense of European identity – particularly as the popularity of US-style fast-food chains doesn’t seem like abating.

  View Post (0) Comments

• Common European projects

  Monday, May 22, 2006 at 6:29 AM PDT

  A major source of Europatriotism can be found in pan-European projects – although several of these projects are only limited to western European nations that are in the EU. There are fewer pan-European projects involving EFTA nations or the nations of Europe in the CIS and the balkans. Because it is believed that a ‘healthy democracy’ cannot exist without a certain amount of emotional connection, EU policy exists to encourage and incite Europatriotism. Therefore some projects are setup to incite Europatriotism. But others are born out of pragmatic reasons. There is little known how effective projects specifically setup to incite Europatriotism are compared to ‘natural’ born projects. The first big test case might be the creation of a European Olympic Team. [5].

  An overview of existing European projects.
  [edit]

  European Defence
  The EUFOR gives ground for emerging Europatriotism
  Enlarge
  The EUFOR gives ground for emerging Europatriotism

  The European Union Force was founded in 2003. The goal is to have a permanent 60,000 person rapid reaction force by 2008. This project is not being taken part in by those nations of Europe with declared neutrality or those European CIS nations. There is some debate as to whether the declared objective is realistic as well as the extent to which any future European force should exist outside of the NATO structure.
  [edit]

  Eurofighter

  The Eurofighter is currently one of the most high-tech military jets available. In a spontaneous dogfight above Scotland between a Eurofighter and two F-15s, the F-15s tried to lock onto the Eurofighter. To the surprise of both the Eurofighter and the F-15s’ pilots, the Eurofighter managed to evade and get behind the F-15s in shooting position, which in the RAF is generally regarded as a position for a sure hit. [6]. This is a project only involving 4 European nations as co-sponsors, although other European nations are likely to purchase aircraft. France, Sweden and Russia all manufacture competitor aircraft.
  [edit]

  Europol

  Europol is a contraction of European Police Office. Europol is the European Union’s criminal intelligence agency. Europol became fully operational on 1 July 1999. Europol has already been featured in works of fiction. In the 2004 film Ocean’s Twelve, Catherine Zeta-Jones played Isabel Lahiri, a Europol agent on the trail of Danny Ocean and company.
  [edit]

  European Space Agency

  The European Space Agency’s headquarters are in Paris, France. ESA’s spaceport is the Guiana Space Centre in Kourou, French Guiana, a site chosen because it is close to the equator from which commercially important orbits are easier to access. During the era of Ariane 4 ESA gained the position of market leader in commercial space launches and in recent years ESA has established itself as the major competitor of NASA in space exploration. The ESA is not an EU agency and not all EU member states are subscribers to the ESA. The partly European nation of Russia has its own space programme.
  [edit]

  European GPS: Galileo

  After many years of discussion, the Europeans finally decided to launch the Galileo GPS network. This is perceived as an effort by the Europeans to reduce dependence on American military technology and as a political statement. Both the ESA and NASA agree that Galileo’s technology is superior to the American GPS system, providing much higher accuracy[citation needed].
  [edit]

  Ryder Cup
  Europe wins 2004 Ryder Cup
  Enlarge
  Europe wins 2004 Ryder Cup

  The Ryder Cup is a Europe vs. United States golf tournament. Five out of the seven tournaments were won by the European team. The Ryder Cup is a clear example where the European flag is being used to represent Europe.
  [edit]

  .EU domain name

  The .eu domain name extension was introduced in 2005 as a new symbol of European Union identity on the world wide web. The .eu domain’s introduction campaign specifically uses the tagline “Your European Identity” . Eventhough this is technically inaccurate – as it does not include non-EU European nations – it’s one of the indicators that the European representation in the world is de facto the European Union.
  [edit]

  Airbus

  Airbus is the world’s top commercial aircraft manufacturer measured in terms of deliveries and number of sales. Airbus delivered more planes and won more orders than its closest rival Boeing (USA). Boeing in 2005 took 1002 orders, while Airbus took 1055. There is speculation as of 2006 that BAE Systems will sell its 20% stake in Airbus to finance further expansion in the US defence market. Of interest is that many in France are proud of Airbus’ success and primarily identify it as a French company, not a European company. The success of Airbus has proved that Europeans can team up and compete successfully with the United States, although there are still outstanding issues with the WTO over allegations of hidden and/or illegal subsidised financing of aircraft projects both for Airbus and Boeing.

  View Post (0) Comments

• Europatriotism vs Eurocentrism

  Monday, May 22, 2006 at 6:29 AM PDT

  The kind of patriotism expressed by Europatriotism is unique due to the post-nation-state organizational character of the European Union. However, it’s not to be confused with Eurocentrism.

  Eurocentrism is the practice, conscious or otherwise, of placing emphasis on European (and, generally, Western) concerns, culture and values at the expense of those of other cultures. It is not to be confused with Europatriotism. Eurocentrism is an instance of ethnocentrism, perhaps especially relevant because of its alignment with current and past real power structures in the world. Eurocentrism often involved claiming cultures that were not white or European as being such, or denying their existence at all.

  The source of a cultural tradition can be seen in the balance of emphasis given to various thinkers and ideas in discussing a subject. In the 1960s a reaction against the priority given to a canon of “Dead White European Males” provided a slogan which neatly sums up the charge of eurocentrism (alongside other important -centrisms).

  In Britain, eurocentric or eurocentrist may occasionally be used in political discourse to mean europhile.

  View Post (0) Comments

• Europatriotism vs Eurocentrism

  Monday, May 22, 2006 at 6:28 AM PDT

  The kind of patriotism expressed by Europatriotism is unique due to the post-nation-state organizational character of the European Union. However, it’s not to be confused with Eurocentrism.

  Eurocentrism is the practice, conscious or otherwise, of placing emphasis on European (and, generally, Western) concerns, culture and values at the expense of those of other cultures. It is not to be confused with Europatriotism. Eurocentrism is an instance of ethnocentrism, perhaps especially relevant because of its alignment with current and past real power structures in the world. Eurocentrism often involved claiming cultures that were not white or European as being such, or denying their existence at all.

  The source of a cultural tradition can be seen in the balance of emphasis given to various thinkers and ideas in discussing a subject. In the 1960s a reaction against the priority given to a canon of “Dead White European Males” provided a slogan which neatly sums up the charge of eurocentrism (alongside other important -centrisms).

  In Britain, eurocentric or eurocentrist may occasionally be used in political discourse to mean europhile.

  View Post (0) Comments

• Eurosceptic influences on European politics

  Monday, May 22, 2006 at 6:27 AM PDT

  Euroscepticism is generally stronger in Northern European countries, including member-states UK, Sweden, and Denmark, all of which have, for example, declined to further their participation in the Economic and Monetary Union as much as the other EU member states. Non-members Norway and Iceland and (further to the south) Switzerland, especially the German-speaking cantons, have also shown a marked reluctance to expand ties with the EU or accept membership.

  According to Eurobarometer surveys, fewer than 3 in 10 citizens of the UK and Sweden feel their countries have benefited from membership of the EU. Most continental European countries tend to be more pro-European, although eurosceptic movements exist in all European countries in some form. Among the new member states who acceded in 2004, the Czech Republic is the most eurosceptic.

  Euroscepticism is likely to have been a factor (at least in part) of:

  * the French and Dutch rejection of the European Constitution by referenda held in 2005.
  * the Norwegian rejection of EU membership, on both occasions
  * the Swiss rejection of membership in the European Economic Area
  * the initial Danish rejection of the Maastricht Treaty (later approved).
  * the Danish rejection of the euro
  * the Irish rejection of the Nice Treaty in the first referendum (later approved). See Ireland’s ‘No’ Vote, although it is at present very much a minority view.
  * the Swedish rejection of the euro in the national referendum on September 14, 2003
  * the fact that Iceland has never applied for membership
  * the fact that Greenland chose not to remain in the EU (then the EEC) when it was granted home rule by Denmark in 1979.
  * the United Kingdom’s unwillingness to be a part of the Schengen Agreement or the Economic and Monetary Union.

  A noted Norwegian eurosceptic during the Treaty of Maastricht negotiations was Anne Enger Lahnstein, representing Senterpartiet.
  [edit]

  Eurosceptic issues
  A poster against the European Union, seen in Athens, 2005.
  Enlarge
  A poster against the European Union, seen in Athens, 2005.

  The issues on which eurosceptics focus vary from country to country.

  In European countries outside the EU, eurosceptics focus attention on the perceived disadvantages of Union membership; for instance, in the case of Norway, the greatest concern is the effect of the EU’s Common Fisheries Policy. In those countries which are already members, but have chosen to retain independent currencies (the United Kingdom, Denmark and Sweden), eurosceptics focus on the disadvantages of euro membership as well as on other aspects of involvement with the EU. Some arguments against the Economic and Monetary Union are built on complaints that the Growth and Stability Pact has been inconsistently applied, and on the recent underperformance of the eurozone when compared with those economies that have chosen to remain outside.

  While many eurosceptics take issue with particular characteristics of the EU as it stands, some maintain in principle that the very concept of the EU is an invention of bureaucrats seeking to create a bureaucratic and undemocratic superstate (or even dictatorship).
  [edit]

  Centralisation

  Eurosceptics oppose the idea of a centralised European superstate, a United States of Europe akin to the U.S., which many see as the inevitable outcome of current integrationist trends. This is a perception disputed by most, but by no means all, pro-Europeans.
  [edit]

  Compromising sovereignty

  Eurosceptics often disagree with current or proposed measures that they see as compromising national sovereignties, including:

  * the proposed European Rapid Reaction Force
  * the draft European Constitution
  * the proposed establishing of a European Public Prosecutor, or the establishing of Eurojust
  * any extension of Europol to include enforcement powers
  * harmonising taxation or welfare benefits
  * reduction to the number of policy areas subject to agreement by unanimity in the European Council, where each country may veto proposed legislation.

  Eurosceptics often propose either radical modifications to the structure of the EU, including more influence for national parliaments, or the withdrawal of their country from the Union altogether.
  [edit]

  Harmonising of justice and home affairs

  Eurosceptics generally consider the harmonising of criminal justice systems in Europe unnecessary. They dispute pro-Europeans’ claims that enhanced judicial co-operation could provide additional protection against terrorists or organised criminal gangs. They believe that moves towards centralised decisions on issues of justice and law are examples of the EU’s lack of choice and poor cultural awareness.

  While most eurosceptics acknowledge that all current systems of justice in the EU offer adequate protection despite their differences, others, including members of the British Parliament, contend that common law systems of justice are incompatible with civil law systems which, according to them, do not provide enough protections with respect to presumption of innocence and other guarantees. (These guarantees, however, are laid out in the European Convention of Human Rights, which all EU members must sign.)
  [edit]

  Euroscepticism in France
  [edit]

  1970s

  In 1978, Jacques Chirac, a rival of then president Valéry Giscard d’Estaing, published the Call of Cochin in which he clearly alluded to Giscard’s party as the “party of the foreigners”. Giscard is a well-known pro-European.
  [edit]

  Recent events

  On the left of the political spectrum, the Parti des Travailleurs, Jean-Pierre Chevènement and the French Communist Party are eurosceptic. They see the European Union as a means through which unpopular economic measures of free markets, free trade, the gradual demolition of public services and Social security and increasing technocracy, all of which they see as part of a right-wing agenda, are imposed on the French public. The Left is split along similar lines on the topic of the proposed European Constitution: the Communist Party, and parts of the Socialist Party, oppose the Constitution as carving ultra-libéral free market policies in stone; but the majority of the Socialist party considers the constitution an improvement, according to an internal vote.

  On the right, Jean-Marie Le Pen (Front National) and Philippe de Villiers are eurosceptic. They are against compromising French independence and the possible integration into the European Union of countries that they contend are not European in essence, such as Turkey. Le Pen is also opposed to the Common Agricultural Policy and would rather have protectionist measures against imports of foreign agricultural products into France, and other imports as well. While the integration of Turkey is supported by president Jacques Chirac, it is opposed by many, including Nicolas Sarkozy, head of Chirac’s supporting party, the UMP.
  [edit]

  Euroscepticism in the United Kingdom
  It has been suggested that this article or section be merged into Euroscepticism in the United Kingdom. (Discuss)

  Main article: Euroscepticism in the United Kingdom

  The debate around euroscepticism has been a major political issue in the United Kingdom since the inception of the European Union (then the European Economic Community or EEC), and has not reduced significantly following UK membership of the Union.
  [edit]

  Eurosceptic views in the UK today

  Many people in Britain feel poorly informed about the European Union. Partly because of this widespread unfamiliarity with the fundamentals of the organisation, there is a wariness of its institutions, processes and policies.

  Eurosceptics regard the EU as lacking in democratic process, overburdened with bureaucracy, and threatening to national sovereignty. Most of the UK’s mainstream magazines and newspapers, notably a tabloid press dominated by interests sceptical of the European Union such as those of Rupert Murdoch, carry what some see as partisan coverage of EU laws and policy. Some commentators argue that this coverage contributes greatly to eurosceptic views; others contend that it simply reflect the views of the readership.

  British eurosceptics are often against political and bureaucratic centralisation while remaining in favour of other pan-European measures such as a free trade area.

  Eurosceptics point out that the EU is frequently good at professing high ideals, but poor at delivering on things. The failure to make any appreciable progress on the Lisbon Strategy is cited as one example.

  Some British eurosceptics, including Members of Parliament, maintain the superiority of British institutions, traditions and methods with respect to those of neighbouring countries, and argue that harmonisation would be culturally insensitive. For instance, with respect to European judicial integration, they claim (controversially) that the civil law systems found on the Continent do not provide comparable presumption of innocence and other protections. Many eurosceptics in the UK are against the state funding of European political parties.

  Eurosceptics argue that as the fifth largest economy in the world (by nominal GDP, 16.5% of the European Union, behind Germany and before France) and a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council, the United Kingdom has very substantial influence. They also observe that there is no simple correlation between the size of a political entity and its success, pointing out that there are several democratic and prosperous small countries, and several unstable, undemocratic or impoverished large ones.

  They see the European Union as anachronistic for its attempts to politically and economically unite a whole continent, arguing that the penchant for centralised blocs is increasingly outdated in a world where globalisation and localism are the main competing economic philosophies. Additionally, they claim that most Britons have few cultural or social links with Europe, and feel closer to the spirit of the Anglosphere. The journalist Jeremy Paxman goes even further, arguing in his book “The English” that it is a dislike of ‘funny foreigners’ and an ‘island mentality’ that is at the root of English (though not necessarily British) anti-European feelings.

  Recent UK polls show that the majority of the British electorate:

  * is opposed to UK membership in the euro;
  * does not feel well informed about the proposed new European constitution (recent polls have suggested a roughly even split on whether to accept or reject it [1]);
  * but does not want to leave the EU altogether.

  [edit]

  Eurosceptics in UK political parties
  Both sides of a beermat produced by the United Kingdom Independence Party
  Enlarge
  Both sides of a beermat produced by the United Kingdom Independence Party

  The debate between Eurosceptics and pro-Europeans is ongoing in British political parties whose membership is of varied standpoints. The two main political parties in Britain, the governing Labour Party and the opposition Conservative Party, both have within them a broad spectrum of views concerning the European Union.

  In the Conservative Party, debate over Europe has been ongoing since the 1970s, sometimes to the detriment of other issues. A particular tipping point for British Conservatism came in the period 1987-1988 when leading Conservatives – including the then Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher – realised that the European question was no longer (if it had ever been) just about an extension of the free market. Thatcher’s Bruges speech in September 1988 and the subsequent formation of the Bruges Group galvanised this emerging opinion. One may argue that a reverse process was happening within the Labour Party during the same period.

  Currently, euroscepticism is a significant current of opinion within the Conservative Party, to an extent perceived to be greater than in any comparably important political party in any other EU member state (but this is to be expected in a country where a large proportion of the population is eurosceptic). Pro-European elements on the left of the Conservative Party also suffered disproportionately more when marginal constituencies were lost in the 1997 General Elections.

  However, many commentators believe over-interest in the issue to be an important reason why the Conservative Party lost the General Election of 2001. They argue that the British electorate was more influenced by domestic issues than by European affairs. This is said to be illustrated by the poor performance of the breakaway Pro-Euro Conservative Party in the 1999 European elections, although there is little track record of success generally for breakaway parties in the United Kingdom.

  After the electoral defeat of the UK Conservatives in 2001, the issue of eurosceptism was important in the contest to elect a new party leader. The winner, Iain Duncan Smith, was seen as more eurosceptic than his predecessor and concern was expressed that his victory could result in an inflammation of the issue within the party.

  As opposition leader, Iain Duncan Smith attempted to disaffiliate the British Conservative Members of the European Parliament from the federalist European People’s Party Group. As MEPs must maintain a pan-European alliance to retain parliamentary privileges, Duncan Smith sought the merger of Conservative MEPs into the eurosceptic Union for a Europe of Nations (UEN) group. Conservative MEPs vetoed this move because of the presence within the UEN of representatives of neo-fascist parties who do not share similar domestic politics. In 2004, Duncan Smith’s successor, Michael Howard, emphasised that Conservative MEPs would remain in the EPP Group so as to maintain influence in the European Parliament. However Michael Howard’s successor, David Cameron, has pledged to withdraw Conservative MEPs from the EPP Group as soon as possible.

  The governing Labour Party is also split into eurosceptic and pro-European factions. Historically, the party tended towards euroscepticism, indeed the 1975 Labour Conference voted to leave the EEC (Tony Benn was the leading Labour anti-common market politician at the time and remains an important left-wing EU-critic). But today under Prime Minister Tony Blair its policies are generally pro-European. However, a significant minority of Labour MPs have formed the Labour Against the Euro group, opposing British membership of the single currency. The group has support from minority parts of the Trade Union movement, while the majority of trade unions remain staunchly pro-European.

  The UK’s third-largest parliamentary party, the Liberal Democrats, is strongly pro-European.

  The United Kingdom Independence Party, which advocates the UK’s complete withdrawal from the European Union, received 16% of the vote and gained 12 MEPs in the 2004 European Election. The party was subsequently weakened by a leadership struggle and the defection of prominent member Robert Kilroy Silk. In the following General Election of 2005 neither UKIP nor Kilroy-Silk’s new Veritas party succeeded in gaining a substantial percentage of the vote, or any seats in parliament.

  The Scottish National Party has tended to be Europhile since the 1980s, however, for some the example of Norway has encouraged a Eurosceptic Scottish independence movement. This has found some separate expression in the Free Scotland Party, founded by a formerly prominent member of the SNP, Brian Nugent. As the SNP’s heartlands tend to be in fishing and farming areas of Scotland, they have been seen as a real threat to the Europhile SNP. However, this has not yet emerged. Polls show a significant amount of Euroscepticism in Scotland, but neither UKIP nor the Conservatives are very powerful there.
  [edit]

  Eurosceptic British press

  In the UK, many newspapers, notably the Daily Mail and the Rupert Murdoch newspapers (The Sun, the News of the World, The Times and The Sunday Times), are eurosceptic along with the broadsheet Daily Telegraph and Sunday Telegraph, and have published many stories highly critical of the European Union and its policies. The accuracy or otherwise of these stories is hotly disputed, and in some cases the actions of international bodies with no connection to the EU have been attributed to it. Examples include headlines such as “Ludicrous EU officials ready to ban yogurt”, The Daily Telegraph, 10 November 2003, where there were simply proposals on standard labelling and these proposals were initiated by the UK government, and reports in several UK papers in March 2000 that the EU planed to ‘reduce’ UK condoms to European sizes, when it was in fact the European Standardisation Committee (CEN) which proposed labelling changes, an organisation with no connection to the EU. In response, the European Commission has created a website dedicated to explaining its point of view. [2]

  Pro-Europeans allege that some coverage of the European Union by UK tabloids is xenophobic, particularly through what they sometimes regard as conscious attempts to influence British politics by denigrating foreign countries (Such as Daily Express’s article about renaming Waterloo Station in London, as it could offend the French [3]}. Many eurosceptics reject this allegation as a slur. Tony Blair, the British Prime Minister recently said to Jose Manuell Barroso “See what I have to put up with?” regarding the British Press’ unfavourable cover of the EU Budget 2007-2013.

  The daily newspaper of the hard-left, The Morning Star (connected to the Communist Party of Britain) takes an internationalist, democratic and Marxist eurosceptic position. Under the Editorship of Mark Seddon, Tribune, the journal of the Labour Movement, tended to give space to eurosceptic contributors, including controversially, Marc Glendening of the Democracy Movement. This position was defended by other centre-left eurosceptics who also spoke on platforms with the Democracy Movement once the Democracy Movement had successfully given direct assurances that it was not xenophobic, racist or sympathetic to extreme nationalists.
  [edit]

  Euroscepticism in Denmark

  Most of the Danish population is relatively enthusiastic about European initiatives of an economic nature, such as a free trade zone, but much less so about social policy. Enthusiasm for the project has declined slightly since the 1970s when Denmark first joined.

  Worries in Denmark generally concentrate on the possible erosion of the Danish social safety net under EU guidance, and perhaps more importantly, the subversion of Danish identity in a large community of powerful nations. Danish nationalism, since the late 19th century has focused on the specialness of Denmark’s “smallness” and the value of local customs and traditions. The notion of a powerful, centralised EU runs counter to this now entrenched and powerful sense of national identity.

  Despite the influence of big business, which is generally europhile, Denmark has resisted inclusion in the euro.
  [edit]

  Euroscepticism in Central and Eastern Europe
  A vandalized EU sign in Poland, seen 2003.
  Enlarge
  A vandalized EU sign in Poland, seen 2003.

  One common argument raised by eurosceptics in the new EU member states from Central Europe is that the European Union’s bureaucracy and perceived socialist tendencies may be sustainable for mature Western European economies, but will bring the still fragile post-communist economies to a grinding halt. These viewpoints have often been encouraged when governments tried to excuse increases to the fiscal burden as harmonizing law with EU requirements, even when those laws had not been introduced for old EU member countries. Pro-Europeans argue the increased regulatory burden is feasible through post-accession increased economic growth, and that now inside the EU they will be able to help reform it.

  Other issues include the need for new entrants to initiate EU-level border controls with non-accession neighbours. This has a big impact on the Poland’s border with Ukraine. The introduction of the EU’s visa regime has often greatly reduced cross-border trade with these neighbours, thus bankrupting many small family business in one of the poorest regions of Poland. Some consider Poland’s joining the EU to be an act of disloyalty towards Ukraine, ultimately pushing it further into the Russian sphere of influence. Many economists believe that, on a country wide level, these disadvantages will eventually be offset by the freedom to travel and do business across the EU, though the benefits may be distributed unequally.

  The Czech president Václav Klaus is Central Europe’s most outspoken eurosceptic or, more precisely, a self-described eurorealist. He believes that democracy cannot work at a supernational level. He has warned Europe of “dream world” woes:

  The enemies of free societies today are those who want to burden us down again with layer upon layer of regulations. We had that in communist times. But now if you look at all the new rules and regulations of EU membership, layered bureaucracy is staging a comeback.

  Other criticisms of the European Union are related to its inability to prevent the recent increase in ethnic nationalism across Eastern Europe; the example of Kosovo is often cited. The EU is sometimes accused of trying to impose models that worked in the Western European countries without any regard for the different reality of Eastern European life, and it is claimed that this approach produces more problems than it solves.

  Some Romanians, Slovaks and Croatians claim that the irredentism of Hungary has found a new platform built by the European Union in Eastern Europe. Alleged irredentist Hungarian politicians (among them Viktor Orbán, ex-prime-minister) are claimed to be helped by European regulations in involving themselves in the internal affairs of neighbouring countries. The main practice denounced is that Hungary is trying use the legitimate concept of ethnic minority rights in order to promote various forms (mostly subtle) of revanchism in the region. The claim is supported by Hungary’s amending the status law trying to redefine the idea of nation and extending special economic, social and cultural benefits to ethnic Hungarians in neighbouring states (Romania, Slovakia, Croatia and Ukraine), who had objected to the law in 2001. The European Commission for Democracy through Law (Venice Commission), a body of the Council of Europe, was called in by Romania and criticised the Hungarian initiative. However, this did not stop Hungary from pursuing its intentions which, in the opinion of affected Eastern Europeans, is another proof of Europe’s inability to handle the ethnic nationalism in Eastern Europe.
  [edit]

  Eurosceptics in the European Parliament

  In 2004, 37 MEPs from the UK, Poland, Denmark and Sweden founded a new European Parliament group called “Independence and Democracy” from the old Europe of Democracies and Diversities (EDD) group. The main goals of this group are to reject the Treaty establishing a constitution for Europe and to oppose further European integration. Some delegations within the group, notably the United Kingdom Independence Party, advocate the complete withdrawal of their country from the EU.

  The group’s leaders are Nigel Farage of UKIP (10 MEPs), Jens Peter Bonde of Denmark, and Maciej Giertych of the League of Polish Families (Liga Polskich Rodzin, LPR) (10 MEPs).

  The right-wing Union for Europe of the Nations Group is also eurosceptic as are some parties within the left-wing Confederal Group of the European United Left – Nordic Green Left and the European Greens – European Free Alliance. The UK’s largely eurosceptic Conservative Party are part of the European People’s Party and European Democrats which has mainly a euro-federalist agenda.
  [edit]

  Terminology

  The appropriate use of the term eurosceptic is sometimes disputed by those on both sides of the pro-/anti-EU debate. Eurosceptics who feel that their position should emphasise a desire for greater national and parliamentary independence over specific criticisms of the EU sometimes argue that the positive-sounding antonym pro-European contrasts with the more negative eurosceptic, giving a rhetorical advantage to those who advocate European integration.

  In order to avoid this, euro-realist has been coined as an alternative. However, in recent years this term has sometimes come to denote a milder form of euroscepticism, according to which it is not necessarily in countries’ interests to withdraw from the EU or disband it completely, but rather to modify its structure to some extent.

  Other synonyms that are sometimes encountered include euro-critic and the much more pejorative europhobe. The simple adjective anti-EU can also be used.

  Many eurosceptics dissaprove of the term pro-Europeans to denote their opponents. They maintain that their pro-democracy ideology is more ‘pro-Europe’ than the federalist position. They prefer to call their opponents ‘europhiles’ or euro-fantics and their philosophy as pro-EU, federalist, integrationist or euro-centralist.

  It should be noted that there are at least two types of eurosceptic. These are the ‘withdrawalists’ who advocate leaving the EU and the ‘reformists’ who wish the EU to be wholly transformed. Both of these types of eurosceptic may be found on the right and left of the political spectrum. A third type of eurosceptic would be those that want the EU to be dismantled and replaced by new geo-political arrangements.
  [edit]

  Criticism of the European Union by non-Europeans

  As the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe declares the Falkland Islands and South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands to belong to the British overseas territory the Argentinian parliament adopted a resolution declining the treaty[citation needed]. The Rio Group supports the Argentinian resolution.
  [edit]

  Defence of Euroscepticism

  Many holding eurosceptic views would say that they are not “anti-Europe” or “anti-EU” in itself, but that they take a more practical, realistic and objective view of the purposes of the EU and the lengths to which they feel they and their EU member state should be involved. Holders of so-called “pro-European” views are frequently viewed by eurosceptics as being too idealistic, academic and theoretical in their ideas of what is desirable and practical with regards to cooperation amongst nation states. A more extreme view occasionally expressed against “pro-European” politicians is that they are playing a game to get their name into history books: it is more statesmanlike to “build a European nation” than not to, but the reality (so such eurosceptic views hold) is that they are effecting change for changes sake and not for any purpose of furthering the common good and/or doing what electorates want.

  View Post (0) Comments

• Euroscepticism statistics from the European Commission

  Monday, May 22, 2006 at 6:26 AM PDT

  How the Europeans
  see themselves

  Looking
  through the mirror
  with public opinion surveys

  Brochure with graphics Introduction   197 KB Europeans at the end of the 20th century   318 KB – Life satisfaction   1.644 KB – The legacy of the 20th century + The values of Europeans   2.294 KB European citizenship   3.468 KB The European Union – Knowledge and awareness   2.534 KB – Support for European Union membership   4.423 KB – The process and speed of European integration   5.194 KB – Trust in the European Union and its institutions   4.354 KB Policies of the EU at the end of the 20th century   4.939 KB European issues and priorities at the end of the 20th century   3.830 KB Shared opinions? Women, the younger generation, and leading professionals   3.941 KB Europeans and the future   3.134 KB

  View Post (0) Comments

• European Commission Propaganda Comic

  Monday, May 22, 2006 at 6:21 AM PDT

  This article was distributed in the form of a press release dated 16 September 1998, from the Freedom Association. Having read it and acquired a copy by phoning the EU Commission’s office, we share the Freedom Association’s concern that the publication is propaganda rather than educational in content and intent. It also assumes that changes such as the single currency have already been approved, despite the electorate not yet having been consulted as was promised by the UK government; indeed, what at first might seem a pro-EU but relatively innocuous publication appears on closer scrutiny to indicate some rather unpleasant (even slightly racist) attitudes on the part of its producers, and a heavily political agenda.
  Comic it may be, but certainly not funny… without further comment, here is their review.

  The European Commission is stepping up its propaganda war to young European schoolchildren with a glossy 29 page comic book in full colour entitled The Raspberry Ice Cream War. It is produced in every official community language. It is subtitled “A comic for young people on a peaceful Europe without frontiers” and produced and distributed by the European Commission’s Directorate-General for Information, Communication, Culture and Audiovisual Media. The propaganda follows the Resolution 88/C-177/02 ‘to strengthen in young people a sense of European identity’ and ‘make them aware of the advantages which the community represents’.

  The comic, however, may prove to be a step too far. It has apparently caused intense embarrassment at the London office of the European Commission. Despite being provided with 75,000 copies from Brussels they claim to have only distributed ‘about 20 copies’ on request and most of these to MEPs. The rest presumably are gathering dust in their Oxfordshire warehouse.

  Why are they so unenthusiastic compared to the rest of Europe? In Austria, for example, the Ministry for Education has decided to send the publication to every school. What is it that the European Commission in London is hoping to keep away from media investigation? Perhaps the brash claim in the comic that “border controls … went out ages ago” when this is certainly not the case for the UK or the Irish Republic and the British Government continues to oppose ending our right to control entry into our country. Perhaps the comic’s claim that “we’re even going to have the same currency soon as well. It’s called the euro”, arrogantly ignoring the fact that this is a contentious issue not even recommended by this Labour administration and hiding both the fact that it would need to be put to a referendum of the British people and that only 11 of the 15 EU states anyway are going ahead on 1 January 1999.

  The clear aim of the comic is to contrast the European Union with a Europe in the metaphorical Dark Ages. As one of the characters Paul puts it “Frontiers and barriers everywhere and people fighting wars for the stupidest reasons.That’s exactly what it looks like here. Kind of weird.” Obviously those who are opposed to the European Union are living in the Dark Ages and are “kind of weird”.

  In an amazing demonstration of political arrogance and dissimulation the Head of Representation of the European Commission in the UK, Geoffrey Martin, on 10 September condemned Euro-sceptics for their ’shrill protests’ in a speech to the third annual conference of the UK Network of European Relays. He claimed, in language reminiscent of the old Soviet Union, “…these minority elements are intent upon misleading the public. Their statements and beliefs are based upon a false premise — that the European Commission is brainwashing and pamphleteering. This is nonsense but it is worrying to see how many people are being taken in by the deliberately misleading propaganda, which these bodies are peddling around the country.”

  The comic follows a major initiative last year by the European Commission’s London representation. A distribution of the booklet What exactly is Europe was sent to 30,000 schools. It was aimed at 11 to 14 year olds and has been challenged by Freedom Association supporters for its blatant one-sided propaganda. Among the dishonest Orwellian tricks played in it on our children is the claim that in June 1975 the British people voted to stay in the European Community whereas, of course, they voted to stay in the European Economic Community. What’s in a word? Why, just the difference between a common market and national independence.

  The children were also told that “In total, every UK citizen pays £1.32 per week to the EU.” This mathematical sleight of hand was performed by pretending that ‘total’ means what we pay less what we get back in services. Using this argument a British government could say we paid no taxes to them at all since the government spent everything they received from ‘us’ on ‘us’. Perhaps children will soon be taught that we pay nothing to the EU. This would be quite ‘correct’ because since we are now all European citizens what ‘we’ pay to the EU is all given back to ‘us’ whether we are Greek or Portuguese.

  Although the Department for Education and Employment refused to act over the blatant breach of the 1996 Education Act requiring political impartiality the flak received by the European Commission over its distribution has made its British arm more circumspect.