In general, it seems to me that Federalism is misunderstood in the UK.
Subsidiarity is a basic tenet of Federalism and means that decisions that are best made at a more local level become the responsibility of the locale and only the decisions that are best made at a higher level are made at that higher level.
Why then, are we in the UK so virulently anti-Federalist?

I can think of three reasons.

The first is as you say people misunderstand the concept and think a Federated Europe means rule from Brussels on everything i.e. they don't know Subsidiarity exists or if they do think very little would end up being decided locally anyway.

Those who do understand the concept simply feel the EU is not democratic enough i.e the Federal Government is not/would not be democratic.

Thirdly whether the federal government is democratic or not people don't think it will act in the UK's interests. So for example they believe it could impose a Europe wide financial transaction tax unilaterally (despite the fact 17 out of the 27 countries will not impose one).

A cause not helped by the wildly inaccurate media scare-mongering about euro-excess, leading to a wrong-headed belief amongst the proletariat that they'll make us sell straight bananas or ban yorkshire puddings.

I am fearful of an in-out referendum for this reason - we're not educated enough to deserve one.

All of which is also indicative of the piss-poor state of our press in particular and media generally, and the level of public debate.

It is a basic thing. Why should you trust more remote (genetically speaking) people to have a big say in your life? Especially when millions of your countrymen have died at their hand over centuries? Why trust people coming with a completely different way of thinking and legal system to interfere win the machinations of a country with superior principles? It would be mindless and dangerous to.

Wow, even by your standards Dally

I think the alternative is insane, including for the reasons stated.

because you're a racist xenophobe, more like.

As opposed to an inane ranter?

You aren't. You are trusting a Federal Government to have a say in your life on Federal issues in the same way the various states in the USA do. So the Federal Government would not stop the UK banning handguns for instance. A fine example of Federalism and Subsidiary was enacted in New York this week when the State legislature approved tougher gun laws than the Federal Goverment seems willing or able to do. That is how Federalism and Subsidiarity works and how it works here as well.

It makes perfect sense to me for certain things to be run federally such as things like Interpol and the key is getting the balance correct.

I think the fact you ask the question at all puts you firmly in the "misunderstand the concept and think a Federated Europe means rule from Brussels on everything" bracket.



If you had stopped after "Why should you trust more remote (genetically speaking) people to have a big say in your life?" you might not have got so many brickbats. Honestly where do you draw the line historically? 1066?

If you really want to argue on the basis of past conflicts then you have to accept we have many allies in Europe in particular Holland, Belgium and Denmark who we liberated. We are doing a fine job of alienating them at the moment but even the idea the Germans and French are trying to rule over us by stealth via federalism is nuts.

Furthermore if we help shape Europe's Federal model we will hardly be being dictated to.