Peter wrote:
France would be OUT next and that would be the end.
Is this based on any kind of objective fact?
We just elected a President who is nothing but a big fan of the EU and voted against another candidate who campaigned against the euro and the EU, but who ironically has a seat at the EU parliament.
So I do not believe the French would actually vote to leave the EU. One problem I that any vote in France is made into a national election, even local elections. During the last referendum on the EU the French people actually voiced an opposition to the sitting governments policies rather than an opposition to the EU.
Of course the UK leaving is much worse for EU than it is for the UK. How the EU will work in the longer term with France and Germany left, without the third large player, the UK, is a mystery to me.
All eyes are on France now. If they get their act together the EU will thrive. This also requires my fatherland to finally realise that it is in our own best interest to have Eurobonds and even transfer payments to other EU countries. Every successful federation has common bonds and transfer payments, see the USA or Germany itself for example. In the long term the EU will evolve into a confederation if not an outright federation.
If France breaks rank though I fear for the worst. Germany might then assemble an alliance of like minded neighbouring countries that form a kind of EU remnant while the south sinks into chaos. If the EU breaks up completely war is not entirely unlikely.
The problem for Norway (whose politicians explicitely warned the UK to leave the EU) is that Norway is very close to the EU, even a Schengen member, and supports most of its decisions, without much chance to influence these decisions, not beeong an official member. I remember reading an interview with a professor from Oslo who called that a “trap for Norway”.
But whatever, Norway is one of the countries I could imagine emigrating too. If there only was a little bit more sunshine.
@Aviathor: Absolutely. The new French government is a big supporter of the EU. Macron would never leave.
“Ever closer union” was written in bold text right in the 1957 Treaty of Rome. But the UK always treated it as a mere trade union despite Churchill of all people already proposing a United States of Europe back in 1948. He had learned the lesson of two devastating world wars. The Brexiteers obviously have not.
It wasn’t a case of not learning it. One needs to take a much longer time perspective. The UK voters would have never voted for a political union, at any time. The UK was just not interested. As the one-time PM Ted Heath (the one who did it originally in the mid 1970s) said not long before he died: had the people been told the truth [about a likely political union] they would have never voted for the Common Market entry… we had to lie to them. There is a lot about this on google… e.g. this though that goes off on various old tangents…
Brexit was just the inevitable happening, but it could not have happened without either (a) a referendum or (b) UKIP getting enough power. In mainland Europe nobody will make the mistake of (a) again 
and (b) has too high a bar to come about, though France looked a bit shaky for a bit.
But the issue is not just the UK. Look at e.g. French opinion polls. If France was offered a referendum today (or in fairly recent times), the EU would probably end. So it isn’t going to be offered. And all the time it isn’t offered, the opinion polls are irrelevant and everybody on the mainland can smugly laugh at the UK as having been a “reluctant European” 
Actually the whole of Europe is a “reluctant European” if you look at what people on the ground think. To varying degrees of course.
There is a much more basic cultural issue. In all of Europe today, if you asked 1000 random people which country they belong to, 990 would name their own country and the other 10 will say “I am European”. Of course those 10 will be posting heavily on social media Whereas the same experiment in the USA will produce about 990 saying “I am American”. That is how Europe is made up… it has always been a coalition of overlapping interests but self-interests always come first. Anyone trying to do business in “united Europe” learns this very fast, discovering that he needs a very good local (and fully “German”) distributor in Germany, another very good local (and fully “French”) distributor in France, and so on… this makes Europe expensive to market to because all these middlemen want a nice cut and are probably selling competing products… unless you are really big and then you just set up a subsidiary in every country.
The EuroGA posting demographic is of course different from the above, by self selection.
Whereas the same experiment in the USA will produce about 990 saying “I am American”. That is how Europe is made up…
But this is because the US have been united for over 200 years while the EU is just over 50 years old. And because they all speak only one language over there (now). After all, the US population is composed from descendats of the people who form the EU over here.
If France was offered a referendum today (or in fairly recent times), the EU would probably end
The French just had an election and they could have voted for Le Pen. Instead they clearly voted for Macron, and the EU.
OTOH look at the UK election. Where is Mr. Farrage today? How does UKIP do? (How many seats exactly did they get?) Why did Mrs. May lose so much of her support? Also the result of the Brexit votes was so close that it divided your nation. What if the Brexit vote was repeated tomorrow? I for one am sure the outcome would be different.
We will all have to live with it, but we better do it in peace.
But this is because the US have been united for over 200 years while the EU is just over 50 years old. And because they all speak only one language over there (now). After all, the US population is composed from descendats of the people who form the EU over here.
Agreed, but 150 more years is a long time to wait
Also I would suggest that those who arrived in the new lands were more open to creating a new country. Europe is a very old place and most of it will never change. And why should it? The different identities are nice… To quote the old joke
European paradise:
You are invited to an official lunch. You are welcomed by an Englishman. Food is prepared by a Frenchman and an Italian puts you in the mood and everything is organised by a German.
European hell:
You are invited to an official lunch. You are welcomed by a Frenchman. Food is prepared by an Englishman, German puts you in the mood but, don’t worry, everything is organised by an Italian.
On balance I regret Brexit.
The UK had a special place. All sorts of opt outs and cherry picking that came from the strength of our negotiating position when we joined. We overlooked the value of those elements, which, once now given up, are gone forever.
Europe was and is far from perfect. It has suffered and will suffer a lot of growing pains, and it may still not survive these. However, albeit cynically, was it the “right” time to abandon ship?
There is a principle in sailing which goes along the lines, only abandon the vessel when you find you need to climb up into the liferaft. It is a principle that probably works well enough if you have the misfortune to land on the sea.
The Union might well have had some water flooding into the bilges, but the pumps were keeping up with the flow, and I am not sure it was the “right” time. That “time” might have come, and it might never have come, we just needed to wait a little longer.
Even more importantly, the time was never the right time when we had our own instabilities. Cameron went to the country not because he wanted to, not I suspect even because the country especially wanted him to, but because a fractious minority in his own party pushed him. It was clear then he neither had the full weight of the party behind him, or that if the outcome was to leave, he would preside over a less divided party. The right time was when the party was united and Parliament supported the outcome. Neither was the case. The outcome was even more predictable. A more divided Conservative party, or, a Labour Party that had never really been in favour, having to be seen to carry out the will of the people. We have already the first, and we may well end up with the second. It is not a question of hindsight, but obvious that no good could have come out of the timing, unless you could guarante the country turning its back on Brexit, and it was always clear that was something you could not guarantee. Cameron believed the people were going to vote to stay, but a more astute operator would have covered his back and reliased it was simply the wrong time to ask the question unless you wanted to make a bet on your political future with poor odds on offer. In reality he threw the dice and lost, and had no backup plan, just like a PFL when you turn the engine off, but find you need to start it up again, but it doesnt play ball.
Peter wrote:
same experiment in the USA will produce about 990 saying “I am American”
Except in Texas!
@Fuji_Abound
Very good analysis really Brexit. I think the latest election results rather support your point.
