Many current liberals are against the EU and further integration. Quite often they are thrown into one bag together with conservatives, but the truth is completely different. What unites these is dislike for the EU. But what divides them are the reasons for that distaste.
Why don't conservatives like the EU? The reason is simple - the EU regulates and plans transnationally. It is a German-French pact for them to control the rest of Europe. They do not like Euro-regulation because they see the regulation of "foreigners" in it.
Simply put, they do not like the EU because of its international approach. They don't want a German to regulate us. They want us to regulate ourselves.
Basically, they have nothing against banning light bulbs, various standardization ("uniformity") and redistribution. On the contrary! They want to regulate, they want to redistribute, they want to manage and plan - but nationally. They want to have their "Czech" regulations. If we approved all European regulations as Czech laws ourselves, without the inspiration of the EU, many would not see a problem in that.
However, the liberal's approach is quite the opposite. They don't care if it regulates and redistributes Czech, German or orangutan. The important thing is that someone regulates that someone redistributes.
And regulation and redistribution are inherently bad for liberals.
Why do liberals reject the EU? Why do many want to stand out? Why don't they just want to change it inside? The answer is simple: because it doesn't work.
It's basically simple math. The Czech Republic has 22 representatives in the European Parliament. There are a total of 736 MEPs.
The Czech representation in the European Parliament is at the level of less than 3% - only this part of the European Parliament and its decisions are decided by Czech voters.
If currently up to 80% of the laws adopted in the Czech Parliament come directly from the EU, then only 22,32% of Czech citizens can decide on their affairs. In other words, our vote in regular parliamentary elections is only 22% strong out of one ten millionth - the individual decides on his affairs from 0,000000022. The rest is handed over in Brussels.
A liberal promotes the maximum personal freedom of the individual. The personal freedom of the individual means that the individual decides on his own affairs. In the case of the existence of the state, the individual should decide on the highest possible range of things himself - without state intervention. However, where the state acts, it should then have the greatest possible power to change anything. The strength of an individual to decide on his or her affairs should be as close as possible to the number "1", preferably it should be directly "1".
What is not logically necessary to manage at the state level, let it be left to the individual. If not individuals, then at least the village, the region. Naturally historically shaped state, this optimal political area is the maximum - in the village there is an individual, for example, one thousandth. In the region, by one hundred thousandth or a millionth. In the state already once ten millionths. In the EU, one hundred and five millionth of 3%. I don't know what mini-number would come out of that.
The larger the whole, the less the power of an individual to decide for himself, his sovereignty, is closer to that one. A transnational entity, a political project without historical roots like the EU, does not mind liberals because of its "transnationality" as such. We don't mind that those regulations are German, French or any other. In the same way, those regulations would bother us, even if they were ours, Czech.
However, it is possible to reverse the trend in our Czech "optimal political area". At EU level, however, this is impossible.
We do not want a "nation state" to replace one collective decision-making about individuals with the same name with only a different name, as de facto conservatives want it. We want it to increase the power of individuals to make decisions for themselves.
As the anarcho-capitalist would say, a small nation-state is much better abolished than a multinational multibillion-dollar mole.