Frexit? A potential rebirth for EU, or its end?

[mOgliE]

Hello world.

Wanted to bring a subject on the table, a subject that is more and more representated in French politics and might become a reality in the next French presidential elections.

There was 11 candidates in last presidential elections (the only election important in the country, others are just useless bullshit as the president has all the powers). 7 of them want to leave the EU, counting as 48% of the votes. We're at the breaking point and a year and a half after that, it seems obvious that EU didn't get any new support in the population. So it seems reasonnable to suppose more than half of the population wants the Frexit right now.

Now Brexit was important because it was symbolic, but honestly who cares about the UK? They have always been the least enthousiasts of the EU, were the most independant and were already only obeying their former colonies aka 'Merica.
But France is one of the centers of EU, Frexit would mean EU has no longer nuclear power, 13% of its population, 15% of its GDP and the biggest part of its military strength (I know there is no EU army but there is an alliance). Moreover France is not an isolated islance, without it it means that Spain and Portugal at least are a bit "out" of the EU too.


Two questions emerge then:
-Is a Frexit such a good idea for France?
-What would be the consequences for the EU? Would it be the end?

For the first question... Well anyway if half the population wants out then country should go out. That it be a good or a bad decision doesn't really matter, that's what democracy is supposed to mean.
For the rest EU hasn't done much good to France for the simple reason that France is one of the most leftist country of Europe hence it has heavy regulations and taxes and work right specificities, and EU is basically destroying all of this.
EU meant the end of national companies (which lead to huge losses on the yearly balance of the country and rise of expenses for the people), end of tons of regulations that destabilized important industrial sectors, and the open market means a HUGE unfair competition with workers of Eastern Europe without any of those working rights.
Add to this the tax evasion and the... Complete betrayal of Belgium, Netherland and Luxembourg that should be considered as a casus belli for me.

For the second question, it seems to me that EU can continue without France of course, but would no longer be a great power. Simply because it would reduce its power drastically on all aspects:
-Economically it wouldn't be so bad, just a 13% reduction doesn't mean it's the end. Though Euro would be probably deeply fucked compared to the current situation, but that's more a trust issue.
-Politically it shows an incredible weakness of course, and you lose the only nuclear power and permanent member of the security council. That means you're just no longer a big player of the political field
-Militarily it's just the end. UK and France were the 2 biggest armies of EU, France being the first and having both nuclear submarines and carrier. With both left, EU can't do anything.


Your thoughts on this? For or against Frexit? And would it mean the end of EU?

[1714920426]

1714920426

[1714920426]

1714920426

[1714920426]

1714920426

[Obiwankenodium]

In what way did the netherlands, belgium and luxembourg betray france?

In general, i do not think its a good idea for any country to leave the union and return to their own currency, economy etc.

But to be honest, what did france bring to the eu? Bit chauvinistic to think france is the centre of the eu, because it isnt.

[Jet Cash]

Now Brexit was important because it was symbolic, but honestly who cares about the UK?

Well you ought to, because it is the Eton/Oxford elite who control the EU as well as the UK, and this is why there is an attempt to block Brexit.
The real problem stems from the toxic  derivatives that EU banks hold. Most of the contracts are designated using LIBOR, and arranged through London. Brexit may mean that the contract have to be rewritten, and that could cause the destruction of many of the banks.

[mOgliE]

In what way did the netherlands, belgium and luxembourg betray france?

In general, i do not think its a good idea for any country to leave the union and return to their own currency, economy etc.

But to be honest, what did france bring to the eu? Bit chauvinistic to think france is the centre of the eu, because it isnt.

You mean appart from being a foundator of the union and bringing most, if not all, the military and international power of the EU?
Germany brings the economy, France brings the power (and the science but that's something widely spread not just this contry).
UK brought a bit of the two but reluctantly and without comitting to the project.


Concerning Benelux betrayal I suggest you look after the tax evasion treaties those countries have signed with European companies. They basically accepted to steal a huge part of the tax income of France while being officialy "allies"
And I don't mean it like "they have lower taxes" no. That's not a crime to have lower taxes than France of course ^^
They specifically and as a government accepted fraudulent funds to be taxed in their country instead of France for a small fraction of the normal taxation. They basically said to French companies (not only by the way, they betrayed tons of European countries) ok we'll make false declarations so you can pay only 1% taxes here instead of the normal French taxation.

That's why you can't say that Ireland is a traitor for example, becase they just have lower taxes. They didn't sign specific deals with this companies, they just have a different system and everybody accepted that when they accepted them inside the EU. Can't complain.

[mOgliE]

Now Brexit was important because it was symbolic, but honestly who cares about the UK?

Well you ought to, because it is the Eton/Oxford elite who control the EU as well as the UK, and this is why there is an attempt to block Brexit.
The real problem stems from the toxic  derivatives that EU banks hold. Most of the contracts are designated using LIBOR, and arranged through London. Brexit may mean that the contract have to be rewritten, and that could cause the destruction of many of the banks.

That's true but false at the same time.
Rather, that's true but England is not the only country doing so inside EU.
Other countries like Luxembourg or even special zones like Monaco (inside France) can do exactly the same thing.

Brexit won't do much damage to banks sadly enough, they'll jsut have to rewrite things with another lenient territory that's all.
They'll lose a bit of time and probably a tiny bit of money but I don't believe it'll hurt them.

Though I wish you're right of course!

[TECSHARE]

The EU is dead. It just doesn't know it yet.

[Cøbra]

EU wouldn't survive without France. If a Frexit were to happen, Italy would quickly follow and then Greece/Spain/Portugal. There would be nothing left.

The timing of the referendum is key though. It really should happen a while after the situation with Brexit is starting to be forgotten, otherwise more simple minded people will get spooked with "Brexit destroyed the U.K economy, do you want the same for France?" and vote to stay in the EU. People should start to see the British economy looking stronger as that makes the case for a Frexit a lot more appealing. Politicians that want to do Frexit too soon might actually be helping the EU, since the vote is likely to be so split that if you try to pull the trigger too soon, you might fail and keep the EU alive for much longer.

I think the issue with the EU isn't necessarily aimed at the right place though. There's strong technological forces pushing people out of jobs. The resentment caused from that and stagnant/low wages seems to be getting misdirected at the EU. The EU is definitely a corrupt system, but more often than not so is the political system of the nation that wants to leave the EU. Even if a country leaves the EU, sure, maybe the economy will improve a bit after a while, but the trend of lower wages and unemployment will still continue, resentment and hatred will still exist. Who's going to tell all the British or French truck/taxi/bus drivers that their jobs literally won't exist in a less than a decade because of self driving vehicles?

You can't fight economic reality with politics. The Soviet Union tried to do that, failed, and none of its inhabitants ever lived in what someone would call a socialist/communist utopia, they lived like shit. If one's labor is no longer valuable, or is diminishing in value, our modern political systems aren't equipped to do much to help them without themselves falling into extremes and harming everyone else that's succeeding. Personally, I think the end result of these trends will be nations becoming split into either extreme welfare states, or extreme pro-corporate states.

[theymos]

Personally, I think the end result of these trends will be nations becoming split into either extreme welfare states, or extreme pro-corporate states.

Agreed. The UK is an authoritarian nanny state with a very broken political process, and France seems addicted to unsustainable welfare programs. Leaving the EU won't solve their problems, and may exacerbate some of them. But I still support it, since there's a better chance of a few independent countries out of many figuring things out than the EU as a whole, especially when the EU is run by totally-disconnected power-hungry bureaucrats who want to engineer everyone's lives.

Maybe the UK or France could pull it off. I don't advocate it, but I think that a welfare-heavy state can be stable and not too terrible if the people in charge look at economic realities rather than dreams, and maybe the UK people will learn from the brexit mess and put less power/faith in government. Not likely, but you never know.

[mOgliE]

Agreed. The UK is an authoritarian nanny state with a very broken political process, and France seems addicted to unsustainable welfare programs. Leaving the EU won't solve their problems, and may exacerbate some of them. But I still support it, since there's a better chance of a few independent countries out of many figuring things out than the EU as a whole, especially when the EU is run by totally-disconnected power-hungry bureaucrats who want to engineer everyone's lives.

Maybe the UK or France could pull it off. I don't advocate it, but I think that a welfare-heavy state can be stable and not too terrible if the people in charge look at economic realities rather than dreams, and maybe the UK people will learn from the brexit mess and put less power/faith in government. Not likely, but you never know.

Not going to discuss the legitimity of a powerful state here. I'm all for, you're all against and that would be a complicated off topic subject.
But what's sure is that NOTHING GOOD can come from burocrates so far away both from realities and the people.

EU powers aren't even elected. They don't even TRY to make it like they're democratic institution.

I'm all for a strong government, large countries, heavy policies... On the condition that you have strong people and large power of the poplation. If only the government become stronger then it's just dictatorship with extra steps.

[KingScorpio]

whats the use of leaving the EU? do you want to waste money and ressources on internal bordercontroll?

if you leave the common market, you can't be part of the common market. thats how it is.

if the people dont like the europe they can abandon it,

[dogtana]

There are too many economical benefits to let the EU fall apart. I would think the French people are aware of this, but who knows. We didn't think Brexit could happen, but it will. And while Brexit won't harm the EU, Frexit definately could.

I don't really understand people who don't live in the EU wanting it to end, but OK. I fail to see how the EU affects them at all. It is not like it has agressive foreign policy, notable military force, harmful views for enivronment protection, nor is it starting trade wars. Who is afraid of the EU and more importantly, WHY? Because of what it could become? Because it sure as hell isn't much of a factor in international affairs compared to the big players.

As an EU citizen I appreciate free travel, being able to use the EURO, being able to live, work and vote in other EU countries and yeah, the feeling of belonging to something great. The EU has also adopted a charter of human rights that have to be observed by all the member states and the Court supervises this.

Honestly an average citizen hardly feels the effects of EU legislation and authority. Most of legal relations are governed by national law. A member state can even rebel (for example Hungary and Italy regarding refugees), but not much harm will come to it.

I definately think the EU should be governed more democratically. This shouldn't be too hard to change. Then people would realise the EU is not to blame for every single problem. The EU is a handy scape goat. If EU diasppears, thir problems won't disappear with it.

[KingScorpio]

There are too many economical benefits to let the EU fall apart.

no there are only economical benefits to challenge the monopoly of the european central bank, and end the high costs of the european legislation.

but there will be negative consequences, because people will build things wrong, and waste a ton of ressources.

so dont do same mistake like the british that voted for flying pigs.

ending the eu will send many european regions especially the souther periphery, back into medieval age.

[asche]

Missed that masterpiece !

7 of them want to leave the EU, counting as 48% of the votes. We're at the breaking point and a year and a half after that, it seems obvious that EU didn't get any new support in the population. So it seems reasonnable to suppose more than half of the population wants the Frexit right now.

First of all only 77.77% people went to vote.
This leaves us pretty far from 48% of the people voting for a representative that wants to leave the UE.

Moreover your assumption means that people actually vote for any of the candidates only because they want to leave the EU, or that they wouldn't vote for them if they didn't want to.

I am pretty sure that a lot of people voting for both Marine Le Pen and Melenchon don't want to actually leave the EU. It is more about the ideology of both candidates than about the actual measures in their programm.

People voting for Marine often do so because they are racist, or blame the immigration policy for everything bad in France. This doesn't mean they want to to loose all the benefit they got from the EU.
Same goes for Melenchon.

My own feeling about the EU is that it was necessary to further develop our continent.
The first people getting benefits from it are all of the citizens. Globalization is a must today, and the EU and it's borderless region are a very good start.
This also means anyone can easily cross the border and go shopping in another country.

From the point of view of a EU company, all the operations made within the EU are made at smaller cost, and allow for a faster and less expensive market penetration. This has been proven to actually increase the GDP of most european countries.

Of course countries like France or Germany are actually among the ones benefitting the most from the EU.
However it also has increased influx of foreign investment in poor EU countries, making them develop faster.

Every year that passes makes the Union stronger. Maybe it will fail eventually, but I am convinced another Union would soon take its place.

I don't believe any second France will leave the EU in the near future.

Also about your point "that is what democracy is about". You are right but you are also wrong.
This would be true if we had been living in a direct democracy for decades. Which would imply that people actually think about long term before chosing, and doing these choices carefully.
If we want more direct democracy we need to implement this carefully to avoid foolish choices from people that won't have to face the consequences.
When a president, or the government takes a decision many factors are taken into consideration. Public opinion, but also how it will impact the country's future, if it is good or bad (from a moral perspective) and if it respects the constitution. Moreove any technical decision is made after length of analysis from experts of the matter. All of these factors are unavailable to the basic citizens, preventing them from taking a well considerated decision.

[MermanWorld]

French presidential candidate Marine Le Pen is no fan of the European Union. If she's elected president on Sunday, Europe may face the prospect of a French exit from the EU - a Frexit following last year's Brexit. Emmanuel Macron wants to reform the French economy - taking a cue from Germany with a shake-up of the French labor market.

[asche]

If she's elected president on Sunday, Europe may face the prospect of a French exit from the EU

What Sunday? Next elections are 2022.
Also that's not how the french system works. She won't be able to unilateraly leave the EU. And I don't see enough députés or senators back her to actually make that happen.

Most of them are cultivated people who will understand how bad it would be for France.

France is not a dictatorship. It's not like the president can just say that the country will be leaving the Union.

[TECSHARE]

France is not a dictatorship. It's not like the president can just say that the country will be leaving the Union.

But it is ok if they do this to join the union right

[asche]

France is not a dictatorship. It's not like the president can just say that the country will be leaving the Union.

But it is ok if they do this to join the union right

It's not about joining or leaving. It's just not how it works
Edit: at least in France and most democracies which is a criteria to actually join the EU.

[TECSHARE]

France is not a dictatorship. It's not like the president can just say that the country will be leaving the Union.

But it is ok if they do this to join the union right

It's not about joining or leaving. It's just not how it works
Edit: at least in France and most democracies which is a criteria to actually join the EU.

Oh NOW its not about joining or leaving xD

Funny you don't consider it dictatorial to join the EU on a presidential mandate, but it is to leave it.

[asche]

Funny you don't consider it dictatorial to join the EU on a presidential mandate, but it is to leave it.

Which president unilateraly decided to join the EU please? In which country?

I have no clue what you are refering to.

In france the Maastricht traitee has been signed by the senate and the conseil constitutionnel. It wasn't the single decision of the executive.

It also has been accepted by referendum in 1992 by 51.04% of the  votes.

[TECSHARE]

Funny you don't consider it dictatorial to join the EU on a presidential mandate, but it is to leave it.

Which president unilateraly decided to join the EU please? In which country?

I have no clue what you are refering to.

In france the Maastricht traitee has been signed by the senate and the conseil constitutionnel. It wasn't the single decision of the executive.

It also has been accepted by referendum in 1992 by 51.04% of the  votes.

"On September 1992, a referendum in France only narrowly supported the ratification of the treaty, with 50.8% in favour. This narrow vote for ratification in France, known at the time as the ‘petite oui’, led Jacques Delors to comment that, ‘Europe began as an elitist project in which it was believed that all was required was to convince the decision-makers. That phase of benign despotism is over.'[7]"

And the phase of malignant despotism begins! So a mandate of about 1% margin? I am sure there was no voter fraud going on there either right? It gets pretty easy to hide fraud in those kinds of margins.