“Roger” Comments on Leaving the European Union

Transferred from Comments to main posting. SIG

by “Roger”

I have long been sceptical of UKIP’s commitment to a referendum. Suppose the Conservative Party scrapes its way back into office in 2015, gives us a referendum in 2017, and the British people vote to leave. What then? We will be outside of the European Union, but that won’t mean much if we have the same parasitical class of authoritarian social-democrats ruling over us. We will still have the Human Rights Act, the Equality Act, the Communications Act and a vast range of other laws codifying political correctness as state ideology. The Proposed New Independent School Standards came from our own ruling class, not from the marauders of Brussels and Strasbourg. People like Michael Gove and David Cameron are the ones who support the ideological encroachment of the state into private education, and their efforts would persist regardless of our formal relationship with the European Union. There are other EU countries which have no such problem and are not being forced by Brussels to clamp down on true independent schooling.

If the Scottish end up voting for independence and being denied quick accession into the European Union, it will be an interesting case study. Will the severance of ties with the EU (even if only on a transitional basis) transform the SNP and Labour from a group of politically correct pansies into defenders of true civil liberty? I think not. One impetus behind the Scottish independence movement is a heavy resentment towards the Conservative Party because of its perceived desire to cut down the welfare state; this is similar to the anti-Troika rhetoric of the popular socialist movements in Spain, Greece and Portugal, who are raging against “austerity” and all cuts to public spending. The SNP itself views the authoritarian “Nordic model” as an aspirational ideal, which hardly bodes well for Scotland’s prospects if it leaves the United Kingdom. Norway is a good example of a European country which exists outside of the EU, but nonetheless has a stifling officialdom with deep layers of red tape, sky-high tax rates, and a judiciary which is all too happy to imprison people (“Islamists”, “racists” and so forth) for thoughtcrimes.

All of that said, I am no friend of the European Union, nor am I here as its apologist. It is a malicious institution, but it is not the only cause of our woes. I would be happy to leave today, because doing so would deprive our ruling class of its whipping boy and force them to be held accountable for constitutional atrocities like the Human Rights Act. It would also, as mentioned in other comments, remove one layer of government.

By the way, Spiked published an interesting piece earlier this week which touches on the same issue:

“Framing the discussion on human-rights laws simply in terms of Euroscepticism will only avoid or confuse the debate. What happens in the Strasbourg court is far less important that what is happening in courts north of the English Channel.”




  1. Whoa there!
    “Suppose the Conservative Party scrapes its way back into office in 2015, gives us a referendum in 2017, and the British people vote to leave. What then? We will be outside of the European Union,…”
    Not that simple. In the unlikely event that we do vote to leave in a referendum, the likelihood of that resulting in our departure is very slim indeed. What will the referendum commit the government to do? Invoke Article 50 I suppose. That in itself will take time and preparation. Then there is a two year moratorium, during which we are excluded from all talks concerning our future. By the time the EU has chewed us up and spat us out, there won’t be much worth salvaging.

    And, as I keep repeating, consider the results of previous referenda within the EU; the Danes killed off the Maastricht Treaty; Ireland killed off Nice; France and the Netherlands killed off the Constitution for Europe; Ireland killed off Lisbon. None of these treaties stayed dead for long. They were each told to go and vote again and get it right this time. A ‘Yes’ vote is binding; a ‘No’ vote is merely provisional. How can any intelligent person believe that this time it will somehow be different.

    So yes, I hope UKIP’s commitment to a referendum is tenuous. A referendum is the worst thing that could possibly happen. We need a government that is elected on a manifesto of withdrawal. I realise that sounds like a pipe dream, but things can happen with remarkable speed in politics – look at the rise to power of Hitler and the Nazis. If we hold a referendum and the vote, as it almost certainly will be, is to stay in, it’s all over.

    “If the Scottish end up voting for independence and being denied quick accession into the European Union, it will be an interesting case study.”
    It will indeed. The European Union is made up of Regions. Scotland is a Euro-Region, and will remain so if it decides to end the Union with England.

    The Human Rights Act is the work of the Blair government. Since Lisbon, we are not free to repeal it, or at least we will still be bound by the ECHR. Once out of the EU we can of course tell the ECHR to get stuffed.

  2. The E.U. is an extra layer of government – getting out of it would be a good thing.

    Ditto getting out of the European Convention on Human Rights and the United Nations one (the latter written, in part, by Harold Laski and E.H. Carr).

    Would it produce perfection to get rid of these layers of international government? Of course it would NOT.

    But to imply that we should not work to do something because it would not solve all problems, is absurd.

    One starts where one is – reducing the amount of mess, not saying (or implying) “well if does not solve all problems I am not really interested”.

    This effort, by Sean Gabb and his pals, to undermine efforts to get the United Kingdom out of the European Union is the latest of a long line of betrayals.

  3. I tend to agree with the article, if only on the terms that it is dangerous to assume that things are going to be any different once – or if – the current establishment order leave the EU.

    Too many people (such as many people in the newspapers and comment makers there) seem to think that leaving will solve a lot of the problems when it comes to how the world is being shaped, because they tend to think that all the nonsense is coming from Brussels when often it is actually willingly coming from our government as part of a globalist, liberal attitude to the world and certain vested interests who wish to drive things a certain way.

    I suspect “The City”, the banking capital, would really be in the driving seat of such decisions.

    However, I also tend to agree with Paul and Hugo that any ‘referendum’ will be nothing more than a pantomime that will be crafted to deliver a certain result that has been prior agreed regardless.

    This already seems to be allowing the Conservatives to push their middle way of staying in but “renegotiating”. Apparently, they are already spending money promoting this through the back door way of lobby groups and so-called independent organisations.

    No doubt if we do vote the wrong way, we will be offered another opportunity to get it right….lol. But yes, what happens if people out there do vote to stay in?

    I cannot see much reason for staying in, it has to be said, but things and people are very different in Britain now, who knows how malleable they have become to their own slavery and lack of genuine democracy.

    I think a tell tale sign of whether the political class are serious about leaving would be if they spent quite a few years preparing for exit. At present, I see no real signs of this…but I cannot say I have scrutinised it.

    People do suggest alternatives like reinstating better ties with the former commonwealth and British outposts, or getting in with the BRICS. In terms of legislations and so on, yet are preparations being made to discard things or replace things? I tend to doubt it.

    Unless they make these kinds of moves which are extremely obvious and well presented, I think they will continue to make it difficult for us to leave by holding it all over us, the uncertainty, the perceived risk, the sudden exit issues etc.

    But yes, without a more fundamental change in the political establishment and, dare I say, the wider populace at large, I’m not sure much would change upon an exit.

Leave a Reply