So the article doesn’t provide a map, and this is the most effort i’m willing to do:
Morocco in the EU must be some kind of joke.
Always remember: Canada has very close sea borders to two EU member states - closer than the UK had.
(Okay, yeah, these are not EU areas,but…)
So Canada is far closer than we think.
Besides: Fully for it - it would solve a buttload of problems both for the EU as well as Canada, it would help to strengthen the EU against Russian influence, etc.
The only thing I see as a must to remove unanimous voting in the EU and replace it partially by majority voting AND population based voting when required. (There are fairly good models for that - country based voting for topics that touch national sovereignty, population based for more individual topics)
Additionally Iceland, Norway and of course Ukraine are good candidates. Moldavia, Albania, Bosnia, Northern Macedonia, Montenegro, Kosovo I see little issues with once they achieve the requirements Turkey could in theory achieve these, too, but to be honest, I do not see that happen in my lifetime as that would also include the solution of the Cyprus conflict AND a restoration of democracy in a post Erdogan era.
The UK? I would be happy to welcome them back, BUT not just like before. Before Brexit the UK had a bloody good deal. They had lots and lots of specialised rules and exceptions just for them (among other that brought us BSE, btw) and used very aggressive blocking tactics whenever they felt they should get another special solution. Not gonna happen again, folks. Next time you apply the same rules will apply for everyone.
I don’t even see the reason to fret over exact borders. Is Canada on the European continent? No. But in the age of global trade and trivial global travel, that matters very little. What matters more in ease of integration isn’t distance but cultural and institutional factors.
Like it or not, Canada is a European settler-colonial country. Its population is overwhelmingly those of European descent, and its legal and cultural institutions grew directly out of European predecessors. I absolutely do not mean this to say that there should be any kind of racial or religious tests on countries joining the EU. But objectively, in terms of simple practical ease of integration into the block, Canada would be pretty easy. Consider, which would likely be a harder integration, Canada or Turkey? Despite the distance, I think Canada would be a lot easier to integrate than Turkey.
If Canada joined, it would provide a wealth of raw materials for europe. Everything Europe may be lacking can be found in Canada, and they already have extensive mining operations, (and some of the worst companies in the world that operate mines in foreign countries.)
(Maybe an unpopular opinion)
I’d rather not. The EU has already experienced growing fatigue. The further away the member states are, the less they have in common and the harder it will be to agree on political topics.
People in Canada have little in common with europeans, compared to countries within the EU, which are much more alike to another. Canadians are politically, economically and stragegically much closer aligned with the US than with the EU. E.g. a Canadian does not need to care as much about the Russian threat as Poles or Fins do.
I’d love for Canada and the EU to become closer allies but I wouldn’t want them as a (current day type) member. The same goes for Australia, New Zealand or Japan. I’d love them as allies but not as EU Members.
A new Type of EU Membership though, which would profit from the single market, the euro, etc. but does not have voting power on people that actually live in europe though, I’d like.Thoughts and counter arguments welcome
What makes you feel Canada is closer to the US than Europe? Remember, Canada is a European settler-colonial state. Its population descends mostly from European colonists. Its institutions, culture, commercial and industrial practices, etc. all come directly from European predecessors. Canada is an offshoot of Europe. Is it the same? No, certainly not. But I would think culturally Canada is at least as similar to France or Britain as France or Britain are to Finland or Moldova. You have a point about the military threat of Russia. But then again, Canada and Russia are the countries with the two largest arctic coastlines.
We’re in the 21st century, and on a planet that is rapidly warming. You need to start thinking of this perspective:
You need to imagine a future where this ocean is populated and as active as all the other planet’s coastlines. Canada is closer to Russia than Spain or Portugal are. They don’t face a land threat from Russia, but they do face a maritime threat. Now, admittedly, the worst Canada really has to fear from Russia is perhaps Russia trying to seize Arctic resources or shipping routes from Canada. They don’t face the existential threat of direct invasion and subjugation like Finland. But then again, it’s not like Iceland is facing a serious threat of Russian invasion either.
Personally, I can see little reason for allowing Iceland but not allowing Canada. Australia and New Zealand would be similarly easy to integrate from a cultural and institutional perspective, but there distance is a bigger factor. Canada is closer to Russia than some existing EU countries. That isn’t the case for Australia. Canada might risk loosing access to Arctic resources in a war with Russia, but there’s nothing comparable for Australia or NZ.
I’d rather the EU leave out any English primary language speaking countries. The fascist and neoliberal poison seems to spread best from there, and existing influence has already been corrupting enough.
So maybe not Canada, but only Quebec and the First Nations.
Which European country hasn’t had a surge of the authoritarian right in recent years?
Find the common threads between them.
Stubb watched too much ESC.
They’d have to rename it to U
- Reich
Earth Union. E U
Exclude USA. E U
Fine, as long as it isn’t Soviet.
Minor side note “USSR” / “CCCP” kinda just translates to “democratic union, democratic union, democratic union, democratic union”
Soviet is a corruption of sovet meaning democratic assembly.
how does it translate to “democratic union, democratic union, democratic union, democratic union”???
Sojus Sowjetskich Sozialistitscheskich Respublik - Union of socialist council republics
There isn’t even a single ‘democratic’ in the name, yet alone 4
“kinda” “loosely”
i was just being wry, not offering a serious translation service
Minor side note, soviet isn’t a corruption but a transcription using English ortography. The same word is transcribed as sowiet in Polish, sovět in Czech and sovjet in southern slavic languages.
Major side note is that a country needing to emphasize it’s alleged democratic status in the name usually isn’t democratic.
As a Canadian, yes please! Using the Euros sounds great too if it means less conversion fees.
You‘d be surprised to learn how many EU countries never adopted the Euro despite promising they would. As far as I know every EU country except for Denmark made the pledge but many of them never followed through.
The only two countries that have/had real and unique opt-outs concerning the Euro are Denmark and formerly the UK. All other countries technically must eventually adopt the Euro in line with their EU membership.
The only other country actually not introducing the Euro despite meeting the economic criteria for a long time is Sweden. Their people said no in a referendum in 2003, so the government simply doesn’t join the European Exchange Rate Mechanism (ERM II), which you also must be a member of for two years prior to be allowed to adopt the Euro.
Sweden should just grow some balls and join the euro.
Since 2023, at least there were some polls showing a pro-Euro majority for the first time. Maybe the global turmoil will tip the scales. Especially since the Krona effectively already follows the monetary policy of the Euro quite closely, from what I’ve heard.
It does, in economics is said to be “pegged” to the euro.
So I wonder what’s the point of keeping the krona (and I wonder the same for Denmark).
Just adopt the euro and make things simpler for companies, tourists, etc.!
So I wonder what’s the point of keeping the krona (and I wonder the same for Denmark).
People and their traditions. For some, it might feel like losing a part of their identity. Our domestic far-right party of course also eyes with the return of the good old pre-Euro currency.
Just adopt the euro and make things simpler for companies
I once heard of a Swedish company that used Euros internally. So I looked it up and indeed, the Swedish Companies Registration Office specifically permits either SEK or EUR as accounting currencies for limited companies in Sweden. In such a case, using the Krona is almost merely cosmetic.
Our export dominated economy might make the euro a hard sell. Floating the dollar is very helpful since we can devalue it easily and boost exports. Being on the euro has some major downsides.
That said, also some major upsides. It’s just not a pure win.
Australia too, pretty please!
Like Canada we have strong historical ties to the EU, well, British colonial empire to our shame.
Especially if there was a multi-tier eu where there is a geographic part to it and a (financial) policy part. Australia could easily follow the same product safety / social security laws, and if they are willing to do so they should also have a say. Maybe a bit like Eurovision, you can participate in our politics as long as you don’t ask us to travel all the way over there ;).
As a Canadian who cut his teeth on Monty Python, I think Finland is a country where I’d quite like to be.
Alexander is tripping if he thinks Turkey can ever join while Cyprus is a member.
But overall I agree with his comments. He’s a smart dude.
Opportunistic and slimy but sure Canada good addition, Turkey probably not
I think if Turkey ever reverts back to a secular democracy, you might change position on that. I think the ‘they’re Muslim’ part is a smaller problem then you (or at least a lot of people) think, and the ‘they’re not democratic’ part will keep them from joining anyway, regardless how anyone feels about it. Turkey really isn’t as middle-east as the countries a bit more east.
I didn’t even remember religiousness, the dictatorship needs some revolting
I can’t imagine the EU letting a semi-democratic country in. It shouldn’t happen according to the paper reality, but Hungary made sure it won’t happen in the real reality either.
Technically none are democratic as capitalist countries but I digress
His public persona is very different from his private one, and his public agenda is also different from his private one.
As usual, the EU and Canada are talking over the heads of First Nations people. These are the first people who should be asked. Also, dear Canadians, please read this book to become a better settler:
21 Things You May Not Know About the Indian Act: Helping Canadians Make Reconciliation with Indigenous Peoples a Reality
189 pages
https://app.thestorygraph.com/books/9c85ea9f-c47e-4ab7-93e5-74ed14a62f18
I get respecting the wishes of First Nations, but where does this end? Are you implying that First Nations people should get a veto on every policy of the Canadian government? Ultimately, wouldn’t this essentially be establishing people of native descent as a kind of inherited aristocracy over the rest of the Canadian people?
I want to see native peoples, both in Canada and the US, to be well taken care of. Hell, I would like to see government benefits and investment so high that First Nations people had, on average, a higher standard of living than the general populace. The land was stolen from their ancestors; the least we can do is make sure they’re rewarded economically for what was taken from them.
But, it’s also important to remember that the people alive today aren’t the ones who committed the genocide of the ancestors of today’s First Nations. Hell, a sizable portion of Canadians don’t even have ancestors who were in Canada at the time of that genocide. And if you grant one group of people unique political rights, even if as compensation for past harm against them? After awhile, that starts looking really weird in a democracy. Just how long do those of Native descent get this special veto over national policy? How many generations does this go on? We still going to be doing it five centuries from now? Two wrongs don’t make a right. Subjugating one group of people cannot be justified because of the crimes of their ancestors. Compensation and restitution? Sure. Subjugation? No.
If you’re not careful, you’ll end up with an Israel/Palestine situation. Compensating people for crimes against their ancestors is one thing. Giving them special legal rights over others and establishing them as a new aristocracy is an entirely different thing.
Oh, – what a surprise~ – this is downvoted to Hell…
At -2? It’s a short trip to hell from lemmy. Now I just put you on Hell’s doorstep!
Haha; I meant the number of downvotes more than the ratio. But a fair point, regardless.
Why would that be a concern of the EU? That’s an inner political topic of Canada.The EU doesnt have a say in that, and it shouldn’t.
Canada has no legitimate rule over nor ownership of First Nation people. It is not Canada’s place to say “mind your own business”.
Well, the thing about a treaty is that both sides agreed to it. We can have a discussion about how they were negotiated or were written, but both sides signed. These treaties absolutely give Canada legitimate rule over First Nations. That’s why they were signed. It gives FN certain freedoms and Canada certain responsibilities. Again, we can discuss if those have been honoured to the letter, but the Canadian courts regularly uphold those treaties. I suggest you take your moral outrage to a library and find some facts.
Why’s that? My feeling is that all Canadians should have an equal vote on something like EU membership.
I don’t know, First Nations have treaties with the Crown, the crown has treaties with other people. Joining the EU affects business and stuff I don’t see the overlap to FN treaties.
It’s far past time for a new Indian Act. I though JT was going to go for it after the T+RC but he was a chickenshit.
The treaties are broken, purposely, and serve to keep First Nations people under the boot. Trudeau also denied there is structural racism problem in Canada, while the RCMP were harassing First Nation peoples over fishing quotas (this is a few years ago now). Can’t imagine Carney being any better.
Tell that to the Supreme Court who keeps ruling in favor of the treaties. The Indian Act is the real bullshit.
Need that acronym bot to get in here and help me understand this. (Just the last one really. But I do like that bot)
First Nations
Justin Trudeau
Truth and Reconciliation Committee
Pfft
Can I join the EU? Not America, just me. Please. I’m begging
Its called emigration
