The elections to the European Parliament were seen as a mini-referendum on membership of the EU and are being interpretated by some as an indication of whether the referendum result from 2016 should be considered as being representative of the views held by people today.
In the run up to the referendum, we were subjected to many farcical arguments. At times it was difficult to know what was serious and what risible. In an attempt to avoid such nonsense, I offer this concise summation of the differences between the UK and the EU.
The UK is the product of the philosophy of John Locke, the English philosopher. According to Locke, the duty of government is to protect the liberty and the property of its citizens. Government only receives its legitimacy from the will of the people.
In essence, this means the UK citizens are free to do whatsoever they wish, unless there exists a law to expressly forbid such action.
The EU is the product of the philosophy of Jean Jacques Rousseau, the Swiss philosopher.
Rousseau holds forth the view that it it is the duty of all citizens to do all they can to help the government. That it is the duty of the citizens to sacrifice all for the government, in return for which, the government will protect and look after its citizens.
In essence, this means that EU citizens are only permitted the right to act in accordance with laws, which have been passed, which expressly permit such activity.
This explains why the EU parliament cannot initiate, change or question legislation. We can see that times in the EU have not really changed since Louis XIV made the pronouncement: L’etat, c’est moi.
I do not trust politicians to look after me, especially if this may damage or conflict with their chances of re-election.
Barrack Lane, Aldwick