There are plenty of reasons to join or not join a union of any kind.
“But Canada would be forced onto the Euro” to me reads as straight propaganda because it acts directly as an identity wedge. This is even before it not being strictly true.
If you’re concerned about Canada joining the EU, you can merely state that article 49 restricts membership to European states, and it has already been tested by Morocco.
The Danish opt out is not a precedent, it was grandfathered in when the 1992 Maastricht treaty was signed. The same treaty requires all new members to eventually join the euro once the convergence criteria are satisfied.
And chill it with the propaganda accusations. Some times people actually know what they’re talking about and poisoning the conversation with bad faith accusations of some hidden propaganda agenda is just fucking toxic.
I don’t need “identity” issues to argue against the EU. My actual deepest objections stem from the State Aid EU rules that make democratic socialist policies impossible. I just voted for Avi Lewis to lead the NDP and his public option policy proposals are literally illegal in the EU framework. That’s my actual argument against joining a constitutionally neoliberal economic bloc. If the EU tomorrow abolished those rules I would have less of a problem.
Edit: the Euro and the SGP are also problems. Even Trudeau’s moderate deficits would have not been allowed under the SGP. And pegging to the Euro doesn’t make that much sense either, especially when we have Dutch disease in Alberta and we’re generally a materials exporter. My disagreement is economic not identitarian. I’m a dual EU citizen for fucks sake.
For the record, what makes it smell like propaganda is that I actually do think you’re very aware of the pros and cons, and that you keep leading with the currency argument when it’s by far the weakest argument. It’s the most emotionally persuasive argument,however, because it’s suggesting Canadians part with a tangible everyday item. People were flustered losing the penny. It pulls emotional levers that simply are not pulled by things like budget deficits and Dutch elm disease. It pulls emotional levels that need not be pulled or even approached because the point is settled already by Article 49. I think you absolutely know all of this, and that is my point.
With precedent of an opt-out clause.
There are plenty of reasons to join or not join a union of any kind.
“But Canada would be forced onto the Euro” to me reads as straight propaganda because it acts directly as an identity wedge. This is even before it not being strictly true.
If you’re concerned about Canada joining the EU, you can merely state that article 49 restricts membership to European states, and it has already been tested by Morocco.
The Danish opt out is not a precedent, it was grandfathered in when the 1992 Maastricht treaty was signed. The same treaty requires all new members to eventually join the euro once the convergence criteria are satisfied.
And chill it with the propaganda accusations. Some times people actually know what they’re talking about and poisoning the conversation with bad faith accusations of some hidden propaganda agenda is just fucking toxic.
I don’t need “identity” issues to argue against the EU. My actual deepest objections stem from the State Aid EU rules that make democratic socialist policies impossible. I just voted for Avi Lewis to lead the NDP and his public option policy proposals are literally illegal in the EU framework. That’s my actual argument against joining a constitutionally neoliberal economic bloc. If the EU tomorrow abolished those rules I would have less of a problem.
Edit: the Euro and the SGP are also problems. Even Trudeau’s moderate deficits would have not been allowed under the SGP. And pegging to the Euro doesn’t make that much sense either, especially when we have Dutch disease in Alberta and we’re generally a materials exporter. My disagreement is economic not identitarian. I’m a dual EU citizen for fucks sake.
For the record, what makes it smell like propaganda is that I actually do think you’re very aware of the pros and cons, and that you keep leading with the currency argument when it’s by far the weakest argument. It’s the most emotionally persuasive argument,however, because it’s suggesting Canadians part with a tangible everyday item. People were flustered losing the penny. It pulls emotional levers that simply are not pulled by things like budget deficits and Dutch elm disease. It pulls emotional levels that need not be pulled or even approached because the point is settled already by Article 49. I think you absolutely know all of this, and that is my point.
You seem very invested in making me out to be a manipulator. I can’t prove to you that I’m not an elephant.
europe isn’t a continent though