“Break-up of EU would be good for its member states” – British politician
Published: 25 March, 2010, 12:53
Edited: 01 November, 2010, 06:39
TAGS: EU, UK, Interview, Politics, Economy
Europe as a continent would be happier if the European Union broke up, says British politician Nigel Farage.
“If you look back through history, democracy was the most wonderful mechanism for stopping people tending to head towards violence. If you take the democracy away, then all you are left with is direct action and possibly violence,” says Farage, who is also a member of the European Parliament for Britain’s South-East. “I think, that Europe as a continent would be much happier, if the French were French, the Germans were Germans, the British were British, they had their own democracies, they ran their own economies – and we traded and cooperated together and tried to access good next-door neighbors. For me that’s a much better vision of Europe than this idea of centralized institutions.”
Nigel Farage adds that the collapse of the Euro would benefit the European countries’ economies – and the first great victory that the UK secured was in keeping the pound.
25.03.2010, 11:12
2 comments
Kemerovo region: coal-mining center of RussiaIn the heart of western Siberia, the Kemerovo region is a unique area in terms of the combination of mineral resources in contains. The region |
Bailiffs break down door to deliver victim to courtBailiffs have broken down the door of respectable St Petersburg resident, only to convoy him to court as a victim. |
The main problem I have is the fact that in any fair trade agreements where there is a significant disparity in economic might between two countries, the small country gets dominated economically, and if you control the economy, you control the country. That's why it benefits the UK, France, Germany, Spain, Italy. The trillion dollar economies, whereas countries like Hungary have more and more industries ruined by price dumping and total control of all sugar companies in Hungary. The collapse of the Hungarian sugar industry is a great example due to French price dumping practices. Wine in the Czech republic is facing the same problem. Then there's the heavily polluting German industries being shifted into the Czech Republic just so Germany can continue to meet its ecological requirements. And the French wine industry continues to be subsidised at the EU's cost in order to keep them afloat, at the expense of the smaller economies. It is not unlike what NAFTA is doing to Canada, and to a lesser extent, Mexico, as Mexico managed to negotiate somewhat better control of its economy. Everything gets bought out, and profits go outside the country, leaving mostly low paying jobs as the sole economic benefit. The Croatian tourist industry is another fine example where just about everything is owned by international companies, and billions of euros a year earned does not stay within the Croatian economy. It just has low paying jobs and whatever is bought locally from these industries to benefit it.
About all this possible Paneuropean-Eurasian mergers: First, I can understand the point jako777 has given. Slavic/Orthodox countries on one side around Russia, and Western/Catholic countries around France/Germany. Second, I think that Turkic factor has beign missed - there's vast and homogenous Turkic/Muslim territory, spreading from Turkey to Xinjiang (province in west of China with Uyghur majority), to which Mongols can be added (since they share common culture) - thus Russia,China,Iran etc would have significant territory losses... So, if history does repeat itself, we would again have Western and Eastern Roman Empires, as well as Turkish/Mongol Empire? And let us not forget the Arabs, and their Caliphate across southwest Asia and north Africa :D (I was sarcastic - if you people think that any of this is doable, then you're in wrong, at least when it comes to current geopolitical situation. Who knows, maybe it will happen in 100 years? For now, all these common blood/heritage groups have their Leagues - Pan-Slavic, Arab, Turkic etc, but they aren't to be transformed in EU-type of organization, because that's not the reason for their existence).












October 27, 2010, 19:38, Goran wrote > The main problem I have is the fact that in any fair trade agreements where there is a significant disparity in economic might between two countries, the small country gets dominated economically, and if you control the economy, you control the country. That's why it benefits the UK, France, Germany, Spain, Italy. The trillion dollar economies, whereas countries like Hungary have more and more industries ruined by price dumping. I agree. Two main instruments for subjugation of 3rd world economies and economies in (never ending) transition are MMF and WTO, both operated by Western oligarchy. MMF lends money, later pumps it out through interest income, which leads that countries' economy to ruins, since they indirectly take control over their legal systems, proposing self-damaging laws and rules which country must apply, if wants to get that money. WTO, at the same time, controles countries' export through rates, making sure no one takes away their lead in world market and accordingly, controled country never gets positive income, only negative one. As economy colapses, all strategic companies are being sold to domestic and Western oligarchy for pocket change. Domestic oligarchy is protected by their Western counterparts (but the're only good, until Westerners complete their infiltration - after that, domestic "businessmen" are being dumped).