The Consequences of Brexit (part 3)

[silentP]

Unofficial, but it's said that de Gaul feared English becoming the common language and that is why we were turned down entry initially.

[I1L2T3]

It's politics. He knows that post-Brexit the UK wants to strenghthen the English language and bring together the English-speaking world as one club.

 

Some Brexiters have said that but it's certainly not a stated aim of the UK.

 

This betrays your own thinking I suspect: British Empire v2

[L00b]

Unofficial, but it's said that de Gaul feared English becoming the common language and that is why we were turned down entry initially.

Completely wrong I'm afraid.

 

That sort of guff about languages, whether now or then, is just clickbait material for simpletons. Statesmen tend to have a somewhat broader appreciation of socio-economic issues and trends.

 

Back in 63, Heath was asking for special terms about EC import duties in respect of Commonwealth imports (for fear that implementing EC duties would damage the UK's trade relations with the Commonwealth). De Gaulle saw this (and other UK demands) as the UK cherry-picking, and basically said "if you want in, you take the lot; or you don't get in period".

 

De Gaulle saw Britain for exactly what it was (with all its requests for exceptions, derogations and other one-off specials), and what it has now decided to revert back to: an opportunistic trader uninterested in pushing a mutually-beneficial socio-economic development on a common front, but just out to form a regional free trading club and no more.

 

His opposition was borne from an understanding and appreciation of the fundamental difference between continental economics and politics (the 'big 6' of the day, continuing to rebuild less than 20 years after the end of WW2, unwilling to be subservient to the US, and laying the bases for long-term cooperative stability) and British economics and politics at the time (maintaining remnants of Empire running/privileged ties with Commonwealth, in thrall to the US, economically opportunistic).

 

The irony that Thatcher nevertheless managed to eventually bring this situation about (a free-trading club with lots of caveats, exceptions and other special terms all benefitting for the UK), is not lost on many in the EU, rest assured.

 

This is the very reason for the EU27's unity and its upfront negotiation playbook, not a desire to "punish" the UK: they're glad to (soon) be rid of the UK's mercantilist approach to everything EU and the rest, and looking forward to get on with socio-economic integration.

Edited May 5, 2017 by L00b

[BoroB]

He's at it again.

 

Jean Claude Juncker says the English language is 'Slowly but surely losing importance'.

 

He knows what's happening behind closed doors.

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jean-claud-juncker-brexit-uk-eu-english-language-french-brexit-theresa-may-commission-a7719151.html

 

Strange then that he was speaking in English.

[I1L2T3]

Strange then that he was speaking in English.

 

Can he not speak it?

[Hairyloon]

Strange then that he was speaking in English.

 

English has, up to now been traditionally the language used. It is right that he makes the explanation for the change in the usual language before changing what is normal.

[altus]

Some Brexiters have said that but it's certainly not a stated aim of the UK.

 

This betrays your own thinking I suspect: British Empire v2

On the subject of 'Empire 2.0':-

 

Tories’ ‘imperial vision’ for post-Brexit trade branded disruptive and deluded

The head of the African, Caribbean and Pacific group of nations has ruled out a free trade deal with the UK until at least six years after Brexit and taken a sideswipe at the idea of a new British trade empire.

...

Informal UK-ACP trade talks have already begun, with a focus on non-tariff barriers and regulatory harmonisation, and the Department of International Trade is considering a joint working group.

 

But the mood has been soured by reported comments from Whitehall officials about an “Empire 2.0” trade strategy. “This is in our view reactionary, trying to recreate what we’ve gone beyond,” Gomes said.

 

Empire 2.0 is dangerous nostalgia for something that never existed

Yet the most jagged rock upon which the Empire 2.0 fantasy flounders is history itself. Britain in the 19th century was two things simultaneously; the hub of the largest empire on earth and the greatest manufacturing and trading nation the world had ever seen. Yet the formal empire and the trading empire were not the same thing. While the empire, especially India, undoubtedly helped make Britain rich, even at the height of our imperial power we traded more with Europe and the United States than with the colonies. It was to the booming cities of America, and to the slave-driven cotton economy of the deep south, that British capital surged in the 19th century. And while much of Africa was painted imperial red on the maps that famously hung on every classroom wall, Britain did more trade with tiny Denmark than with Nigeria, one of her biggest west African colonies.

 

The empire, even at its height, never came close to absorbing the majority of our exports or providing the bulk of our imports, and neither will the Commonwealth, no matter how good a trade deal we win. Empire 2.0 is a fanciful vision of the future based on a distorted misremembering of the past. It’s a delusion and, like all delusions, has the potential to lure us into a false sense of security and lead us to make bad decisions.

[silentP]

Completely wrong I'm afraid.

 

That sort of guff about languages, whether now or then, is just clickbait material for simpletons. Statesmen tend to have a somewhat broader appreciation of socio-economic issues and trends.

 

Back in 63, Heath was asking for special terms about EC import duties in respect of Commonwealth imports (for fear that implementing EC duties would damage the UK's trade relations with the Commonwealth). De Gaulle saw this (and other UK demands) as the UK cherry-picking, and basically said "if you want in, you take the lot; or you don't get in period".

 

De Gaulle saw Britain for exactly what it was (with all its requests for exceptions, derogations and other one-off specials), and what it has now decided to revert back to: an opportunistic trader uninterested in pushing a mutually-beneficial socio-economic development on a common front, but just out to form a regional free trading club and no more.

 

His opposition was borne from an understanding and appreciation of the fundamental difference between continental economics and politics (the 'big 6' of the day, continuing to rebuild less than 20 years after the end of WW2, unwilling to be subservient to the US, and laying the bases for long-term cooperative stability) and British economics and politics at the time (maintaining remnants of Empire running/privileged ties with Commonwealth, in thrall to the US, economically opportunistic).

 

The irony that Thatcher nevertheless managed to eventually bring this situation about (a free-trading club with lots of caveats, exceptions and other special terms all benefitting for the UK), is not lost on many in the EU, rest assured.

 

This is the very reason for the EU27's unity and its upfront negotiation playbook, not a desire to "punish" the UK: they're glad to (soon) be rid of the UK's mercantilist approach to everything EU and the rest, and looking forward to get on with socio-economic integration.

 

I didn't say it was gospel, I said unofficial.

 

I know we're a right royal pain in the arse politically and perhaps that's why Winston never saw us as being a part of it. I see no reason why we can't embrace it from a distance. I said before I hope it works for the rest, it's beneficial to us as well.

[L00b]

I didn't say it was gospel, I said unofficial.

Indeed, and so I brought a bit of factual knowledge to help you understand why any such 'unofficial' rumour is just guff

I know we're a right royal pain in the arse politically and perhaps that's why Winston never saw us as being a part of it. I see no reason why we can't embrace it from a distance. I said before I hope it works for the rest, it's beneficial to us as well.

I'm quietly confident the EU27 will very much welcome your embracing intent...

 

...from afar indeed

[Blackbeard]

Unofficial, but it's said that de Gaul feared English becoming the common language and that is why we were turned down entry initially.

 

When I started working with the European Space Research Organisation in the late 60's there were 2 official working languages, French and English. Countdowns for launches were in French if the project scientist was French, any other any nationality it would be in English except one Welsh scientist insisted doing a practice in Welsh. The people who could master any language problem were the Dutch, maybe that's why the technical centre was in Holland.