The EU's criticism today is - to some extent - every. Something bothers everyone, for almost everyone it is "Europe in crisis"Everyone reports the need reforms or the inevitable end. All the more it is necessary to orientate: which of the Eurosceptics is just mere authoritarian, who is prevented by the EU from seizing power and who is criticizing because it defends individual freedom?
Criticism of the EU is based on two basic branches:
The first branch it is very value-oriented: the EU is bad because we are ruled by you communists, who command us ten gender, laws go by from Brussels, they are just mean to us and have taken over the whole organization those neo-Marxists, supporting homoagendu. And so.
And now imagine that he will become President of the European Commission, for example Viktor Orbán. He will cancel teaching on behalf of the European Commission gender throughout the EU, will enforce its conservative values throughout the EU and we will somehow reach an authoritarian-conservative paradise of contemporary Hungarian style.
What would be the position of critics, building their criticism of the EU on valuesthat he promotes, stood up? Their frequent favorite - Viktor Orbán - will make their dream come true. What with this?
It can be expected that with the same vigor with which these value opponents of the EU now defend Viktor Orbán in the position of the "rebel" Hungarian Prime Minister, they would also defend him in the position of the President of the European Commission. If anyone pointed out their apparent change of position, they would only defend themselves that previous EU leaders have sown a lot of problems that need to be remedied.
In fact, the EU's political apparatus is not a problem for them - the problem is that it is now they do not controlthat they are not Theywho can dictate their terms. In other words, if the authorities dictate a way of life that is in line with their values, it's alright, regardless of whether it is my city, state or EU. There would be no difference between them and the current so-called. "Eurohujers" defending the EU only because they are defending their interests today.
The second branch it may look similar at first glance, but in principle it is completely different: it is not value, it is systemic. Criticism of the second branch is that institution The EU is already in principle restrict freedom of the individual. Their much greater power, combined with the much less power of individual voters to compose them, is a kind of archetype bureaucratic autocracy.
So it doesn't matter if the Euro-authorities are promoting the LGBTQ agenda or canceling gender education, both of which are bad for the latter branch - this is up to the voters in the countries, the people in the specific cities, and the users of the services. Not an "authority".
For this second branch, it doesn't matter who is the "chairman of the commission" and "what values he promotes" until the given value is "we won't poke our noses into nothing." This second branch very easily gets into conflict with the first - the second defends freedom, the first fights for power in promoting its ideal world. If the two branches clashed in politics at their national level, they would be in opposition to each other:
The first branch will promote the authoritarian growth of the state and the restriction of freedom for those with whom it does not agree.
The second branch will promote minimal / no state and principle make money, make money, and not just on "economic" issues.
The line of freedom is in national affairs
Therefore, if you see a Eurosceptic, ask him for his opinion on national and local policy issues. Are you a Eurosceptic? And what do you think of same-sex marriage? What about education? What about taxes? What about the social system? What more controversial topic, this leads to a more distinct answer, and that's fine.
At that moment, you can easily tell if it's about a true defender of freedom and his criticism of the EU is built on system problem, not on the issue of values and only on the fact that the EU is being dominated by people I do not agree with; or whether it is the same authoritarian, which we have clouds in different colors and who want to control your life - they are just stuck out that they are not at the helm.
We can easily discover that under the guise of the "fight against the EU", which "takes away sovereignty", lies an ordinary conservative-authoritarian right-wing or left-wing, who - if not the EU - your personal "sovereignty", ie freedom, limits with pleasure much more.