European integration is usually taken as a means to attaint peace and prosperity or at least some short run benefits. Nonetheless political centralization is not conducive to peace. The opposite erroneous reasoning stems from Hobbesian concept of society. Much the less is centralization a necessary condition for prosperity. Arguments for short run benefits are both ethically flawed and economically shortsighted. Even granted the choice is not between the EU on the one hand and an ideal society on the other but rather between two "bads" it is possible to maintain the thesis the European centralization makes our society worse off compared to the present existence of nation states. Empirically it is supported by widening of the public sector in the EU. There, no wealth is produced but only consumed. Another thesis is based on the logic of norm production. The EU monopoly must entail counterfactually worse outcomes than quasi-competition among nation states. However, the key argument is that nowadays one should concentrate not on the current state of affairs but on the processes of future emergence of institutions. EU is definitely a barrier on the way to attain optimal institutional outcomes. It opens up new room for waste, hinders harmony and causes conflicts. As the history of the US proves threats like these regularly materialize.
In order to set up a list of libraries that you have access to,
you must first login
or sign up.
Then set up a personal list of libraries from your profile page by
clicking on your user name at the top right of any screen.