Around the time I heard about the EU referendum, I was already in the process of questioning the established political biases my parents had given me. I'd lost my trust in the BBC, questioned whether being right wing made you inherently evil, as leftists think, or whether all leftist are inherently stupid, as right wingers think. Indeed, a lot of the EU debate has been an outgrowth of this sort of political tribalism. So I decided to listen to both sides and make up my mind based on the arguments involved, as well as the tactics of both sides.
After an analysis of both sides, I have decided to cast my vote in favour of leaving the EU. The first piece of the puzzle is that of trade. The remain camp claims that our economic prospects are bleak, if we decide to leave the EU. However, this seems to me a shortsighted and ludicrous argument. The eurozone is the most influential economic and political group in the EU, and it's in big trouble. The UK alone is the 5th largest economy in the world, while the EU is in financial decline. Let's face it, if by some miracle we end up with tariffs on EU trade, they will have more to lose than we will.
Further, another commonly cited statistic is that around 50% of our trade is with the EU. Well of course it is, we aren't allowed to talk to anyone else! Imagine the amount money that could be made trading with the commonwealth or with China! Imagine the burst of small business growth once they're free of the excessive red tape, designed to restrict giant multinational corporations but which strangles small businesses in their cribs.
One issue that even the remain camp admits is a problem is the lack of nation state democracy in the EU. The European Commission has in the past, de facto, removed several democratically elected leaders, told countries that it was 'inappropriate' to have general elections and dictated to countries what laws they can and cannot have.
Speaking of other countries thinking they can dictate what the EU can and cannot do, what right does Obama have to weigh in on this? If, David Cameron or Jeremy Corbyn endorsed a presidential candidate the American media would go berserk and quite rightly!
It's also hypocritical.
The self proclaimed land of the free would never submit itself to the level of democratic atrophy that the EU imposes on its members. One of the most misused arguments by the remain camp is the idea of political influence. They would wrongly claim that EU membership enhances our political voice. While it is true that the EU has a massive political voice, it is false that we benefit from this. In fact, it is quite the reverse. The UK is the world's 5th largest economy, a member of NATO and a permanent member of the UN Security Council. We have one of the loudest political voices a country could have and that has nothing to do with the EU.
But, I imagine you ask, can't the EU be reformed? David Cameron promised reform, didn't he? Two points to refute this: Firstly: since, when has anyone trusted David Cameron to do anything?
Secondly: he doesn't have the authority in the EU to make sure that these promised reforms happen!
Every request he's made can be overruled by either the EU or the European court. What's more, with the imminent threat of a Brexit to keep them on their best behaviour, what incentive will they have to keep their end of the bargain?
Every supposed benefit of the EU is, not only, possible outside of it but in many cases is already in place. We already have visa free travel with America and free trade with many other countries. We share more intelligence data with the US than the EU, despite the fact that we have a dedicated EU organisation for this purpose. Might I add that it's one of the most inefficient organisations in the world...
In short, the EU is a bloated, corrupt and undemocratic, bureaucratic mess. The people in charge have no incentive to reform it and all the unelected authority to ensure it never is. The UK is one of only two countries to pay more in than we get out. In the vicinity of £50,000,000 a day is paid by us in membership fees. Imagine how many hospitals we could build with that kind of money! Accounting for EU investment in the UK, we lost 8.5 billion pounds sterling in 2015. How can this be to our advantage?
Lastly, I find the tactics used by the remain camp to be abhorrent. Bringing in foreign politicians with no stake to try and sway us is unpleasant. Spending close to ten million pounds of taxpayers money on a politically partisan leaflet is downright un-democratic. This debate should be won on the arguments and the facts. The side which drops factual argument first, is generally the one who gains the least from using it.
I will cast my vote to leave on the 23rd of June. Who will join me?
CS
After an analysis of both sides, I have decided to cast my vote in favour of leaving the EU. The first piece of the puzzle is that of trade. The remain camp claims that our economic prospects are bleak, if we decide to leave the EU. However, this seems to me a shortsighted and ludicrous argument. The eurozone is the most influential economic and political group in the EU, and it's in big trouble. The UK alone is the 5th largest economy in the world, while the EU is in financial decline. Let's face it, if by some miracle we end up with tariffs on EU trade, they will have more to lose than we will.
Further, another commonly cited statistic is that around 50% of our trade is with the EU. Well of course it is, we aren't allowed to talk to anyone else! Imagine the amount money that could be made trading with the commonwealth or with China! Imagine the burst of small business growth once they're free of the excessive red tape, designed to restrict giant multinational corporations but which strangles small businesses in their cribs.
One issue that even the remain camp admits is a problem is the lack of nation state democracy in the EU. The European Commission has in the past, de facto, removed several democratically elected leaders, told countries that it was 'inappropriate' to have general elections and dictated to countries what laws they can and cannot have.
Speaking of other countries thinking they can dictate what the EU can and cannot do, what right does Obama have to weigh in on this? If, David Cameron or Jeremy Corbyn endorsed a presidential candidate the American media would go berserk and quite rightly!
It's also hypocritical.
The self proclaimed land of the free would never submit itself to the level of democratic atrophy that the EU imposes on its members. One of the most misused arguments by the remain camp is the idea of political influence. They would wrongly claim that EU membership enhances our political voice. While it is true that the EU has a massive political voice, it is false that we benefit from this. In fact, it is quite the reverse. The UK is the world's 5th largest economy, a member of NATO and a permanent member of the UN Security Council. We have one of the loudest political voices a country could have and that has nothing to do with the EU.
But, I imagine you ask, can't the EU be reformed? David Cameron promised reform, didn't he? Two points to refute this: Firstly: since, when has anyone trusted David Cameron to do anything?
Secondly: he doesn't have the authority in the EU to make sure that these promised reforms happen!
Every request he's made can be overruled by either the EU or the European court. What's more, with the imminent threat of a Brexit to keep them on their best behaviour, what incentive will they have to keep their end of the bargain?
Every supposed benefit of the EU is, not only, possible outside of it but in many cases is already in place. We already have visa free travel with America and free trade with many other countries. We share more intelligence data with the US than the EU, despite the fact that we have a dedicated EU organisation for this purpose. Might I add that it's one of the most inefficient organisations in the world...
In short, the EU is a bloated, corrupt and undemocratic, bureaucratic mess. The people in charge have no incentive to reform it and all the unelected authority to ensure it never is. The UK is one of only two countries to pay more in than we get out. In the vicinity of £50,000,000 a day is paid by us in membership fees. Imagine how many hospitals we could build with that kind of money! Accounting for EU investment in the UK, we lost 8.5 billion pounds sterling in 2015. How can this be to our advantage?
Lastly, I find the tactics used by the remain camp to be abhorrent. Bringing in foreign politicians with no stake to try and sway us is unpleasant. Spending close to ten million pounds of taxpayers money on a politically partisan leaflet is downright un-democratic. This debate should be won on the arguments and the facts. The side which drops factual argument first, is generally the one who gains the least from using it.
I will cast my vote to leave on the 23rd of June. Who will join me?
CS
RSS Feed
