Catalonia and Scotland should not become independent countries
Debate Rounds (3)
Catalonia and Scotland should not become independant because they are already part of the E.U.
The E.U., ever since its creation, has been moving towards further European integration. It is reasonable to assume that one day in the near and forseeable future, All European countries will be fully integrated into one European superstate, and the idea of independent European nations will be abandoned.
The fact that Europe has a completely shared market and money system, that there is no "German economy" or "French economy proves this.
The fact that borders between European states are only nominal, as travel is free open without checks and restrictions proves this.
The fact that all European states have already sacrificed portions of their soveignty over their nation to the E.U. proves this.
The fact that negotiations are taking place to merge and meld together national militaries into a single European force proves this.
For this reason, it would be very stupid indeed for any European nation to attempt self-determination and soveignty. What is the point of Catalonia becoming its own country? Spain and Catalonia will just find themselves under the same flag eventually anyways. So why antagonize the Union? For shits and giggles? This is just not reasonable.
Vote no against independence movements in Europe.
Just because a country is in the Union does not mean that it will always be. The Union might fail.
In fact, the United Kingdom's citizens are generally opposed towards being in the E.U. and would rather remain British than become European. British anti-continental sentiment and British exceptionalism are the reasons why the UK has refused to adopt the continental Euro and have kept the Pound as their currency. If Scotland becomes independent of the UK, then it is possible to better represent the wishes of the people living on the British Isles. The English oppose the EU but the Scots want in. The Scots and English don't want to be together. If the UK is going to leave the Union, why should it undemocratically and unilaterally decide that Scotlad should follow England? If Scotland becomes independent, the English can be free to decide to leave the Union without impeding on Scottish wishes to remain in the Union.
At the current rate, it would take very long for the Union to fully integrate the various European states. Many European countries oppose deeper integration, such as Spain and Italy over concerns that Germany and France will dominate all European affairs, especially in the military. For now, there is no real effort towards building a "European Army". It is only a treaty-in-the-making between Germany and the Netherlands to combine their defense capabilities into one centralized command.
The entirety of Con's argument relies on a single thing: European citizens disliking the EU enough to vote on dismantling it.
Currently, the vast majority of Euopeans like it the way it is, and more want to see it expanded that contracted. The highest rate of anti-Eurpean sentiment is just less the %30 is the UK. The Con arguement that votes against the EU would likely succeed is simply not reasonable.
Attatchemtn to the EU only grows the older it gets. Every day that the EU continues to exist, the more legitimacy by habit is has. The more strength the EU gains, the more legitimacy through results it gains. Temporary setbacks such as the current economic problems are unavoidable in any free-market economy, and as soon as the economy gets back on track, everyone will be much happier and anti-EU movements will lose much of their traction.
Even if it takes many years for the EU to fully integrate that does not detract from my basic argument.
1. European citizens are already politically represented in the EU, regardless of their nationality and the natinoality of the state they live in. Thus self-determination for political reasons is meaningless
2. The European common market means that there is little to no economic difference between being a soveign country and not when already a member of the EU
"The entirety of Con's argument relies on a single thing: European citizens disliking the EU enough to vote on dismantling it."
This is not true. The entirety of my argument lies in the democratic choice of any nation to be or to be in the EU. Egland may want out, but Scotland may want in, thus the UK should be disunited so that each can make their own decision without it affecting other UK members of differing opinion.
"more want to see it expanded that contracted. The highest rate of anti-Eurpean sentiment is just less the %30 is the UK"
The EU has not made major moves and progress is very slow. I would contend that this is proof that citizens of the EU would rather keep it the way it is than expand it.
"as soon as the economy gets back on track, everyone will be much happier and anti-EU movements will lose much of their traction."
Anti-EU movements have always had great traction regardless of the state of the economy. The present "temporary setbac" is proof that the EU does not work as intended. After some states leave the EU, others may follow suit. Membership is not a sure thing and the pro should assume that the EU will exist forever and that it can only get stronger.
"The European common market means that there is little to no economic difference between being a soveign country and not when already a member of the EU"
This is not true as independent governments can raise their own taxes and decide what to do with those taxes. Maybe Catalonia is being taxed unfairly by Spain and they feel their local government could do better on its own and make better tax-spending decisions without the meddling of Madrid.
The Pro side advocates practicality and common sense. The Con advocated strain and unnecessary effort.
The debate also comes down to this question: Shouldn't Europeans want to be united under shared soveignty? Since they have agreed to have the European movement, the pro argues that yes, soveignty should be held collectively by all and not individually by each member nation.
It is the Con side that argues common sense and practicality. The Pro argues for ignoring the possibility of giving a choice to each community of whether or not it will be part of the EU. The Pro ignores the importance of having a government run by the desires of its people.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.