Leaving the EU implies numerous things but one of them is the failure to participate in European politics. Eurocepticism is a kind secessionist movement projected to the European level. They will vote against any policy passed by the EU even if it goes along their ideological interests and then use the gridlock they created as proof of the system being flawed. This circular reasoning is hardly defendable and benefits nobody. The wish of having just an economic union without it developing into a political union was, is and will be impossible to satisfy.

The reason of politics is to have discussion on issues arising from our life inside society. You will have problems and question arising from pure economical issues. Can workers strike because a company wants to move abroad? Can you impose tariffs on certain chemical exports? Should you take into account if a product comes from a specific country?

These questions demand discussion not only on the economical side but also on issues of workers’ rights, discrimination, competition law, fraud, criminal activities, consumer rights among others. You will end up with the need to deal with those issues and they will keep getting closer to the private life of every individual. Since these problems are a product of the common economy, the integrity of it requires solutions adopted in common. Should each State respond differently, it defeats the purpose of a common market to begin with. That is inevitable in sharing economical ties, you’re sharing goods, capital, services and people and therefore you will need to develop European wide solutions for European wide problems.

Opting for going alone under a sense of national pride and confidence on one’s power on the international plane is well intentioned — albeit a bit idealistic.

For one there are international organisations higher than the EU, such as the WTO for trade purposes, the ILO for workers’ rights and the UN for international relations as examples. The issue with these organisations and part of the reason for the attractiveness of the EU is that with wanting every country as part of their organisation, their effectiveness on enforcing decisions is nothing compared to the EU’s and their extent is very limited.

Second, the EU’s advantage is of acting together as a block to get better deals with other countries. This has been seen with the last edition of Question Time:

34% of [the UK’s] exports go to the EU, only 8% of their exports come this way. 13% of [the UK’s] GDP is down to exports to the EU, [in comparison] to only 3% of theirs

It is a negotiating tactic, you can find it in class action lawsuits and in labour unions as well. Uniting small and big actors together will make it easier — if at all possible — to protect their interests. Protection such as imposing massive tariffs on cheap Chinese made steel in order to protect European companies. These kind of deals may be made by a single State but the diplomatic and economical costs will definitely be much higher. Indeed a small State is easily more dependent on Chinese imports rather than a bloc of 20+ States.

Third, if the need of a Union with other countries is needed, the EU is still a better deal than to become a subject to the world economy. Take the famous examples of Norway and Hong Kong used to illustrate the alternative to the Union. These countries have tailored their economies specifically to service the global economic order, meaning blindly following policy set by the U.S. or China or else face the economical consequences.

Meanwhile the EU has adopted an approach to decision making based on compromise between the right and left political ideologies. This means that the EU’s policy has been centrist for the most part, allowing member States to easily adopt these solutions whilst keeping their domestic government’s political convictions. In turn the collective adoption and the size of the Union makes it a leader in policy making not only in Europe but also in the world on subjects from the trade of chemicals to data protection while browsing the web.

The EU allows for its members greater political autonomy as well as better safeguarding of their laws and policies than if they were at the mercy of the global economy, making them actors rather than subjects.

Marshall Plan Poster (1950's)

Such is the deal, a common grand solution with respects of national interests in exchange for some compromises and concessions.

This is both the advantage and the possible threat to the Union. The stubbornness of some members decided to block legislation betrays the very functioning of the Union. Recent examples include Germany’s pressure not to end austerity measures, Poland’s obstinate rejection of the Council president election even Hungary’s so-called referendum on EU refugee policies. Thankfully, there is a rising will to make these concessions do exist, realizing that either Europeans are in this together or not at all.

Disclaimer: Opinions in PoliticsMeansPolitics.com are those of their authors, not the views of this website or its owners. The contributors’ stories and copyrights for the text and photographs remain with them at all times. Contributors accept full responsibility for the contents in their stories. // Please support our independent journalism today so we can fight fake stories out there… with real ones! Support our magazine today: Support.PoliticsMeansPolitics.com