Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Yes, that more or less covers it. I think your ending analysis applies to brexit more accurately than a mere bleat of english nationalism (that mostly came after).

Far more it was a complaint of feeling disenfranchised by a remote bureaucracy that was percieved as a dead weight and an impediment on people's lives. The fact that most of these problems came from Westminster rather than Brussels was neither here nor there as Westminster elections never allow the "none of the above" option.

However whatever chance the EU has of redressing this imbalance, the smaller states have none, and it is noteworthy that most nationalist movements have no analysis of how they would address this issue. If anything, their solution is to compete ever more aggressively for such investment, beggaring their neighbours even more in the process if necessary.  

As with brexit, we should ask, who benefits? Where did the money come from? I hate to come over tin foil hat CT, but there's increasing evidence of shared interests between the plutocratic elite across the West who wish to stir up trouble and the newly emergent aggressive stance of Russia to bring about the fall of powerful democratic institutions

keep to the Fen Causeway

by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Sun Oct 29th, 2017 at 04:21:22 PM EST

Others have rated this comment as follows:


Occasional Series