And what I'm bothered about is not a simple anti-Britishness. A point both I and Migeru tried to stress is that you cast the conflict and interplay of Eurosceptics, neoliberals, etatists in only a (simplified) Franco-British framework, but the setup is different whether we speak of Scandinavian countries, new members, the Netherlands, Germany or Italy -- and for a European debate with (against) both Euroscepticism and neoliberalism, I'd wish your arguments reflected the latter too. To stress again, Euroscepticism =/= neoliberalism is the most important point for me. *Lunatic*, n. One whose delusions are out of fashion.
As to assimilating euroskepticism and neoliberalism, let's not play with words. The neolibs are hostile to the EU as a political force, but do not mind using the EU clout to push for neolib "reform". So they use the powers while at the same time denigrating them and bashing them, a truely nasty combination, as it doubly deconsiders the EU - as a pusher of neolib policies, and as an apparently corrupt, bureaucratic, non-transparent out of control institution.
The EU Constitution would have reinforced the political legitimacy of the EU institutions, and, via the EP, transparency. With more legitimacy it could have easily fought off the neolib tendencies of those in power, as the less powerful EP today already shows. In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
Except for 'purported', and with the addition of 'on the domestic arena', that far all of us are in agreement.
"Eurosceptic in practice" is one example of your limited and simplified Anglo-French focus.
let's not play with words
Indeed let's not. Using the EU clout to push neolib "reform" is friendliness to the EU as political force. The neolibs are friendly to further EU integration and institutional development, but want it in a way that that clout for "reforms" is enhanced, and resistance paralysed. Outside France vs. Britain, they use the very same pro-business, market-faithful, no-alternative-to-globalisation arguments as arguments for remeining or entering the EU, the Euro, or adopting standards, or the Constitution, or just be enthusiastic about Europe, or to denounce nationalist opponents' views.
Maybe I should recruit you Marek, A Swedish Kind of Death, Nomad, dvx, and a couple of others to write diaries about the neolibs vs. the Eurosceptics and the debate on Europe in each of their countries of good knowledge. Maybe those would also help me explain to you what significant and qualitative difference (for the even worse) Bliar's not being Eurosceptic means at the EU level. *Lunatic*, n. One whose delusions are out of fashion.
That puts them at odds with the euroskeptics on means, not on goals. In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
