England left, is the U.K. in shambles?

[Dozyproductions]

The time table for a new government got moved, not the (still potential) exit from the EU.

That article is just one example of worthless journalism, poorly written, highly opinionated, and very sketchy "facts." Very clearly a piece of clickbait garbage, and I do hope you can see that Dozy. If you don't understand why the article is what it is just look at the layout of the website and timing of said article.

If you see it in the Times, Post, or USA Today you can begin to believe it, but should always question motivation and conclusions.

You have a point lol but,

TVP (Polish Public News) reported that Waszczykowski said he was in recent talks that confirmed the express's article. He went on to say that Poland could not afford to be in such a union.

To go on. This is something that is obvious. Biased media like the Times isn't going to tell you everything that's happening. The EU was sold as a purely economic union. It was only called the euro zone 50 years ago. Now, it doesn't matter how many times you reject the same Lisbon Treaty, the eu is a political and economic union. You must inject a certain element of critical thinking into the equation here and not just pure denial.

[roguetoaster]

Should have been more specific, wasn't talking about the Times UK, but was thinking more NY or LA, basically any large newspaper that still has the wherewithal to print a daily that's more than a flyer (which includes the Times you referenced as well). They all have bias, but when they try to uphold some sort of journalistic integrity it's easier to believe that the spin they present isn't overbearing.

I cannot agree that the EU was ever sold as a purely economic zone in any sense. From my understanding (history major here, but modern was not my focus) the idea of an EU as we understand it had been around since post-WWII, but was never realized as much more than a loosening of border controls, and sporadic agreements geared towards fair trade. Then, following the collapse of the USSR, the idea really took off as it was desired to both protect "Europe" (thought of here as non-Soviet bloc countries, excluding E Germany) from the destabilization of the collapse, and establish a system to basically prevent a one-party domination of the region, while fostering governmental cooperation and free trade. Then the EU as we know it came around and various attempts were of course made to isolate power within the main bloc. Good, bad or indifferent, I don't believe any one country really controls EU policy as there would be no benefit at all to member nations to allow that to happen.

It should also be remembered that the EU was never sold as one thing or another exclusively as each government of each member nation or potential member nation sold the merits (and the opposition the demerits) of membership to their people, and joined for whatever purposes were best for them.

In any case, it does not seem reasonable to argue that Brussels/elites/whomever is totally making everyone else their bitch via the EU, when it is clear that countries are free to leave, adopt or reject measures as they see fit, and disobey directives with no punishment.