How Easy Could It Have Been For EU Lovers To Have Made Their Case?

I was watching a TV debate a few minutes ago chaired by Blair:

The video has obviously been abridged because only Eliot and Blair said anything. The other three panellists were excluded for the purpose of that video. It was excerpts. That is fine, provided that we are aware of it.

What has struck me again and again during the campaign, was that the Remainers had every opportunity in their campaign to describe how beneficial membership of the EU had been. For example, if a lobby group wanted municipal swimming baths to be closed to save money, the authority would describe the benefits of the swimming baths. They would describe all sorts and various benefits, even if those benefits were not monetary. They would talk about masses of children learning to swim – a totally modern phenomenon; they would talk about exercise; they would talk about healthy competition, and they would talk about ‘the general good’ of having such facilities available.

So why did not the Remain campaign extol the advantages of the EU?

The reason is that there are none.

What the EU is, is an agreement between France and Germany. WW1 and WW2 were, essentially, wars between France and Germany. Britain was dragged in. The EU came about because France and Germany decided to get together. No wonder De Gaulle was forcefully against British membership. He probably regarded Britain, and the British Empire (as it existed at the time), as a nasty bastard. Perhaps he envisaged France and Germany as being an invincible force, if they united.

If so, why did he not call for a New Country called France (which incorporated Germany) or a New Country called Germany (which incorporated France)?

The reason that Brexit won is that Europhiles could not describe what advantages accrued to the people of the UK. They should have been able to do so.

In other words, instead of describing the problems of leaving, they should have described the wonders of remaining.

Why did they not? Because they could not. There were no ‘wonders’. What we have seen, in recent years, in the UK, is confusion. No one has any idea of what is TRUTH.

It seems to me that the duty of Government is to simplify and not to complicate. Simplification means having sensible, factual rules. The game of chess is a very messy  and complex thing, and yet the ‘rules’ are simple and precise.

So why could not EU lovers, like Blair, describe the reasons that ‘Provinces’ like Greece are not wealthy? Perhaps he could have complained that the reason is that Greece has not really persecuted smokers.



6 Responses to “How Easy Could It Have Been For EU Lovers To Have Made Their Case?”

  1. Jack Ketch Says:

    So why did not the Remain campaign extol the advantages of the EU?

    because Project FEAR worked so well in Scotland, they thought by prophesying the Zombie Apocalypse they would scare the British the way the Scots were when they voted to ‘remain’.
    A grave (or should that be ‘gove’ ?) miscalculation. They didn’t account for the sheer strength of the BrexSShiteurs’ delusions and bare arsed lies. Fortunately PMT.May , Davis and Blo-Job are making such a pig’s ear of the negotiations that we may still get the promised End Of The World.
    There are manifold wonders to being in the EU, first and foremost the ECHR and EU Citizenship. God help us all when there is no longer any protection from our own courts and politicians.

    • junican Says:

      Regarding your first two paras, Jack, that is precisely what I am complaining about. ‘Project Fear’ was about the horrors if we leave, but not about the benefits which we have received over the years. What were those benefits?
      I don’t agree with your third para. The EU courts have not stopped the corruption, or the crazy directives, or the problems of Southern Europe.

  2. smokingscot Says:

    Sorry for regular repetition.

    IMO the best thing that ever came the Brexiteer’s way were Blair and Osborne.

    Blair because this was true even when the putrid puss was in no. 10

    And Osborne for saying house prices would tank by up to 25%. That was music to the ears of millions who would like to own their own home. And it didn’t worry the majority of home owners who bought their place for the long haul.

    • junican Says:

      I think that Blair started suffering from delusions of grandeur at some point and still does. What did he do for the middle east? Bugger all, as far as I can see. But he still thinks that he knows all the answers.

      As for Osborne, the less said the better.

  3. Jack Ketch Says:

    The EU courts have not stopped the corruption, or the crazy directives, or the problems of Southern Europe.

    Agreed but were they supposed to ? I thought their job was, y’know, dispensing justice and that they seem to do quite well most, ok some of the time. Has the British Supreme Court stopped corruption here, or the crazy laws that Blair and Brown passed or the problems of northern England?

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: