Your opinion on Croatia's membership in the EU

[Marcus Marulus]

I would like the Croatian members of this board (and not only them) to state their opinion on the EU, more precisely, on the perspective of Croatia's membership in that association. As it is known, Croatia is candidate for the EU and negotiations are under way...

My opinion on the EU is extremely negative, something that can be clearly seen from my signature.

I would like also members of this forum to state their reasons for why they are favourable/opposed to Croatia joining EU. I will also state my reasons (but not in this introducory post).

Opinions of people from other countries of SE Europe, those countries (Serbia, Monenegro, Bosnia, Macedonia), which are not yet members of the EU, but their governments (if not nations) want them to join this association, are also welcome.

Notice: please, don't make this thread into another endless Croatian-Serbian trolling contest on territory, history, past battles, etc. Let this thread be about the EU.

[gainsville]

Firstly, let me say I think Croatia deserves membership in the EU; ie she should not be excluded. Whether membership would be good or bad for Croatia is another question.

Economically, I think Croatia would benefit. You described your politics as distributist, so let me add that I mean "benefit" according to the liberal economic model. I would imagine that to a distributist the "dislocations" caused by modern market economics would not seem beneficial at all; ie some of the "traditional Croatian way of life", which distributism, as I understand it, seeks to preserve, would be compromised, or even completely lost, especially in the less populated locales. The kind of indiscriminate mass immigration that is characteristic of -- though not essential to -- modern EU-style econo-politics would exacerbate such processes.

Politically, "harmonization" of values, procedures and even legislation is probably more of a help than a hindrance. I say this mainly with respect to the "transparency" that it encourages, which greatly helps to control the kind of corruption that is typical of the old Communist bloc. Whether Croatia ultimately joins the EU or not, the incentive to meet accession requirements means that the system is "cleaned up" at a faster rate than would otherwise be the case.

Apart from these, the only other clear benefit I see is the opening of access to EU emigration for Croatian citizens. This isn't strictly a benefit to Croatia, because emigrants leave, rather than stay and contribute. However, many Croatians would value the opportunity to work in Germany or Austria, and aspire for Croatia to join for precisely this purpose.

From a liberal perspective, membership would be good, as in theory it would work against the emergence of a hard nationalism. However, there seems to be evidence that the "totalitarian" nature -- as nationalists/conservatives see it -- of the EU seems to be hardening up nationalist politics, and thus creating new and deepening old fissures in EU countries.

I imagine that many Croatians would see accession to the EU as a crucial part of their national aspirations, that would mark their "arrival" as a modern, European country. However, at this stage, there does not appear to be a tremendous upside to membership. There is strong evidence that has emerged over the last twenty or so years that the assumptions that liberal western European countries were built on are faulty and need to be revised. Croatia should be wary of this, and realize that if EU membership requires Croatia to conform to those same assumptions then membership, at this stage, is not likely to be good for Croatia.

(Ja: majka dalmatinka, otac makedonac.)

[Zrinski]

My opinion of the EU is also rather negative. When I was younger I was actually pro-EU but now as I grow older I see things about it that I don't like.

I simply don't see why should would we join EU when we can co-exist with it just fine. I support legislation harmonization between EU and Croatia which the EU ascension is bringing, but when the referendum finally comes I hope the Croatian people will be smart enough to say - NO!. Croatia should have it's status similar to that of Norway and Switzerland.

Sure some will argue we're not Switzerland (we don't have banks) and no we're not Norway (we don't have oil), but we can create brands and products of our own. I believe we have enough potential. If countries like the above mentioned Switzerland, Norway and also Iceland can function without being politically part of EU beaureaucratic machine, so can we.

[Marcus Marulus]

Originally Posted by gainsville

Firstly, let me say I think Croatia deserves membership in the EU

I disagree. Croatia does not deserve such a terrible fate (ie. to enter in the EU).

[Marcus Marulus]

Originally Posted by gainsville

Whether membership would be good or bad for Croatia is another question.

Not bad, but catastrophical.

Originally Posted by gainsville

Economically, I think Croatia would benefit.

Nope. Only a handful of state beaurocrats (those who would be sent to Brussels) and "managers" would benefit, the mass of popultaion would be at loss.

Originally Posted by gainsville

You described your politics as distributist, so let me add that I mean "benefit" according to the liberal economic model.

You are correct: I am not liberal. I dump the whole modern economistic worldview which puts economy first, before everything else, into the garbage can, where it belongs. So the arguments form economic-liberal standpoint do not convince me a bit.

Originally Posted by gainsville

I would imagine that to a distributist the "dislocations" caused by modern market economics would not seem beneficial at all; ie some of the "traditional Croatian way of life", which distributism, as I understand it, seeks to preserve, would be compromised, or even completely lost, especially in the less populated locales.

It has already started and it has terrible consequences, not at least "beneficial".

Originally Posted by gainsville

The kind of indiscriminate mass immigration that is characteristic of -- though not essential to -- modern EU-style econo-politics would exacerbate such processes.

There is not yet mass immigration to Croatia, but there are attempts to foster it.

Originally Posted by gainsville

Politically, "harmonization" of values, procedures and even legislation is probably more of a help than a hindrance.

EU values? Gay-marriage, holocaust-denial laws? Thanks, but no thanks.

Originally Posted by gainsville

I say this mainly with respect to the "transparency" that it encourages, which greatly helps to control the kind of corruption that is typical of the old Communist bloc. Whether Croatia ultimately joins the EU or not, the incentive to meet accession requirements means that the system is "cleaned up" at a faster rate than would otherwise be the case.

Corruption is a very bad thing, anyone can easily agree on that one, but I don't think "transparency" is a great achievement. It may be a part of totalitarian international control: they want to know about everything, so they want you to be "transparent".
Croatia could adopt some European laws on the prevention and fight against corruption, it has not got to join EU in order to do that. If Croatia is so miserable, that it needs external pressure to do some things that are for its own benefit, then it really deserves its nasty fate!

Originally Posted by gainsville

Apart from these, the only other clear benefit I see is the opening of access to EU emigration for Croatian citizens. This isn't strictly a benefit to Croatia, because emigrants leave, rather than stay and contribute. However, many Croatians would value the opportunity to work in Germany or Austria, and aspire for Croatia to join for precisely this purpose.

Emigration is loss to a country, as much as immigration is. I don't particularly value this perspective. This immigration to other countries also fosters inimical feelings against other fellow European nation, from which the immigrants come. German nationalists won't be particularly delighted about a mass of Croatians flooding their country.

An example: emigration of mass of Poles into Western European countries (England and Ireland, for instance), has contributed to creation of an unprecedented negative image of the Polish nation in these countries. You have polonophobia today there where it was none before (e.g. Ireland).
Besides: Germany and Austria are no more promised lands for immigrants. Many more Croats are returning from Germany these days, than going there. Those countries are fraught with problems of unemployment and low wages...

Originally Posted by gainsville

From a liberal perspective, membership would be good, as in theory it would work against the emergence of a hard nationalism. However, there seems to be evidence that the "totalitarian" nature -- as nationalists/conservatives see it -- of the EU seems to be hardening up nationalist politics, and thus creating new and deepening old fissures in EU countries.

As I already said, I am not liberal, so this point is of no relevance to me. The argument: "we should enter in the EU because it will somehow strengthen nationalism", seems a bit ridiculous to me. It would be like saying: you must first infect yourself voluntarily with a deadly disease, in order to get to know the benefits of medical treatment.

Originally Posted by gainsville

I imagine that many Croatians would see accession to the EU as a crucial part of their national aspirations, that would mark their "arrival" as a modern, European country.

Every nation has a percentage of scumbags, so does Croatia too. Those would be very glad to see Croatia as a member of EU. Croatia as a province of the new totalitarian Soviet Union (USA, EU), the glorious modern West, with no sovereignity, neoliberal capitalism - none of these are national achievements. I would rather see Croatia vanish completely, than to be turned into such a monstruous oaf of a country. That wouldn't be a country anyway, but just a beaurocratic filiale of the Brothel of Brussels (EU).

Originally Posted by gainsville

However, at this stage, there does not appear to be a tremendous upside to membership. There is strong evidence that has emerged over the last twenty or so years that the assumptions that liberal western European countries were built on are faulty and need to be revised. Croatia should be wary of this, and realize that if EU membership requires Croatia to conform to those same assumptions then membership, at this stage, is not likely to be good for Croatia.

I agree.

Originally Posted by gainsville

(Ja: majka dalmatinka, otac makedonac.)

Srdačni pozdravi, Makedonac.

[gainsville]

Prometheus, you took a somewhat adversarial tone in your reply. That wasn't necessary, because my post wasn't attempting to persuade anyone of anything. I was simply trying to objectively analyze the situation. I guess you were looking for some debate to sink your teeth into. I'll try to provide some in this post.

Originally Posted by prometheus

Nope. Only a handful of state beaurocrats (those who would be sent to Brussels) and "managers" would benefit, the mass of popultaion would be at loss.

You are correct: I am not liberal. I dump the whole modern economistic worldview which puts economy first, before everything else, into the garbage can, where it belongs. So the arguments form economic-liberal standpoint do not convince me a bit.

As I said, I wasn't trying to convince you. The relative value that Croatia places on economic growth is something for the Croatian people to decide.

Objectively, Croatia is already following the EU-style economic path. I think even someone who sees little value in economic growth per se would have to admit that the current plan is growing the economy. How much the average Croat is better off under such an arrangement is wholly separate topic; objectively, the economy is growing, and EU membership would be more likely to help than hinder this process. Of course, this economic plan is still viable even without EU membership.

It has already started and it has terrible consequences, not at least "beneficial".

As I said, I think that's something the people can decide. The evidence from the rest of Europe is that countries are willing to undergo social change (maybe even "upheaval") in order to benefit economically. My prediction is that Croatia will follow suit. Your job would be, I guess, to convince your countrymen that it's not worth it, or that the perceived benefits are imaginary.

From what I've read of "distributism", I haven't been convinced of the economic case for it. I can't help but feel -- and now I'm getting person, so feel free to hit back -- it suits some, say, city-dweller professional, who is too busy working to really have much time for customs or traditions but he really wants to feel that somewhere out there in the provinces, in some Slavonian village, the traditional way of life is being preserved; naturally, the question arises, if it's so important to him why doesn't he move to the village and live it? The fact that what the professional really wants is his high paying job, just as the peasant wants the new Audi that his present income can't provide. In this sense, "distributism" to me, and perhaps I'm just not well enough informed about it, seems like another "third way" economic proposal that seeks to deliver economic improvements (ie "growth") without disturbing anything; but to paraphrase what some prominent recent economist said, "everyone wants growth but no one wants change; but you can't have growth without change". With respect to Croatia, I just couldn't see Croats satisfied with sluggish or static growth while all around them economies are booming. If that were to happen, I think you would see widespread dissatisfaction and people would be only too happy to jettison whatever "traditions" distributism was supposed to protect; living better in the here and now being considered more important.

There is not yet mass immigration to Croatia, but there are attempts to foster it.

This, of course, is the major challenge the EU faces. I'm sometimes ashamed to call myself a liberal given the disasterous stance liberals have taken on this issue. (I'm pretty sure anyone posting on this site would be only too well aware of the immigration issue.) Personally, I'm not against immigration per se. In fact, I'm actually pro-immigration. But I would never stand for anything even close to what is happening at the present.

EU values? Gay-marriage, holocaust-denial laws? Thanks, but no thanks.

Hehe, you picked the very worst ones.

Gay marriage, or at least gay civil union, is something that I feel forced to accept (and promote) on the principle of freedom. It's not an easy thing to do, because I am as repulsed by the thought of gay sex as much as every heterosexual male is.

Of course, "denial" or any kind of "thought crime" laws are direct assault on freedom of speech and, really, for anyone who values freedom -- as a liberal is supposed to -- that would be reason enough to reject the EU. What is the general (not the nationalist) feeling in Croatia about such proposals? I find it difficult to imagine Croats being too enthusiastic about laws that would have hauled their former president off to jail.

Corruption is a very bad thing, anyone can easily agree on that one, but I don't think "transparency" is a great achievement. It may be a part of totalitarian international control: they want to know about everything, so they want you to be "transparent".

It's important so that the country's own citizens can keep score. Politicians make sure they take every opportunity to cheat the people, so it's important to minimize the opportunities for cheating. I'm not talking about the details of national security, so there's really not much to worry about with respect to "international control".

Croatia could adopt some European laws on the prevention and fight against corruption, it has not got to join EU in order to do that. If Croatia is so miserable, that it needs external pressure to do some things that are for its own benefit, then it really deserves its nasty fate!

Worldwide, the evidence doesn't seem very encouraging that countries without strong democratic traditions feel motivated to do these sorts of things on their own, without external pressure. Now, obviously Croatia isn't Ghana, so maybe it doesn't need EU pressure for this. Still, for all the ills (real and imagined) of the EU, and of post-ww2 liberalism in general, one of the things, in my opinion, that they have got very right are the democratic institutions and procedures they have erected. They might not seem like much to somebody who is more concerned about "nationalist issues", but to me they are some of the oustanding achievements in man's history and, I would say, in moral evolution. Short of the socialist utopia that today only a handful of marxian idealist dream about, this is as good as it gets.

For you, you can look at this way: as terrible as the EU might be for whatever nationalist aspirations you have for your country, at least some good will come of it and it won't be completely bad.



Emigration is loss to a country, as much as immigration is. I don't particularly value this perspective. This immigration to other countries also fosters inimical feelings against other fellow European nation, from which the immigrants come. German nationalists won't be particularly delighted about a mass of Croatians flooding their country.

An example: emigration of mass of Poles into Western European countries (England and Ireland, for instance), has contributed to creation of an unprecedented negative image of the Polish nation in these countries. You have polonophobia today there where it was none before (e.g. Ireland).
Besides: Germany and Austria are no more promised lands for immigrants. Many more Croats are returning from Germany these days, than going there. Those countries are fraught with problems of unemployment and low wages...[/quote]

Yes, it's one of the most important yet most unresolved issues of the modern age. What a scandal that so little gets properly debated on such an important issue.

As I already said, I am not liberal, so this point is of no relevance to me. The argument: "we should enter in the EU because it will somehow strengthen nationalism", seems a bit ridiculous to me. It would be like saying: you must first infect yourself voluntarily with a deadly disease, in order to get to know the benefits of medical treatment.

That wasn't the argument. In fact, I made the opposite point: that EU membership would be bad for nationalism. To me, that is a good thing. (Am I permitted to air this view on these boards? I didn't bother to read the rules, figuring that, since this isn't stormfront, opposing views, as long as they are civilly stated, would be permissible.)

What I also said was that even in current EU countries was that the "totalitarian" nature of the EU is hardening up the nationalists, who seem to be even more extreme than they normally would be. What I meant by this is that even though EU membership works against nationalism -- which to me is a good thing -- it might not be such a good thing afterall because the nationalists are getting even more extreme, and this is causing a great divide in society. I can only see these divides becoming even greater in the next decade, too, especially if the economy goes into recession at some point (which, based on history, it almost certainly will).

Every nation has a percentage of scumbags, so does Croatia too. Those would be very glad to see Croatia as a member of EU. Croatia as a province of the new totalitarian Soviet Union (USA, EU), the glorious modern West, with no sovereignity, neoliberal capitalism - none of these are national achievements. I would rather see Croatia vanish completely, than to be turned into such a monstruous oaf of a country. That wouldn't be a country anyway, but just a beaurocratic filiale of the Brothel of Brussels (EU).

Hmm, that sounds a bit extreme, to call such people "scumbags". Afterall, if Croatia is at all similar to the other European countries who joined recently -- and I see no reason to think otherwise -- then obviously you are calling the majority of the people "scumbags".

At this stage I agree with you that, on balance, Croatia would be better of not joining. However, I don't think it would be the unmitigated disaster you see it as. Well, we'll just have to wait and see.

Your own feelings aside, what do you predict will happen?

[Marcus Marulus]

Originally Posted by gainsville

Prometheus, you took a somewhat adversarial tone in your reply. That wasn't necessary, because my post wasn't attempting to persuade anyone of anything. I was simply trying to objectively analyze the situation. I guess you were looking for some debate to sink your teeth into. I'll try to provide some in this post.

You got me wrong. I wasn't attacking you. It is just that I have some specific way of discussion when ceratin things are concerned. Sorry for the misunderstanding...

Peace?

I' ll naswer to your other points tomorrow, now I am busy.

[Marcus Marulus]

Originally Posted by gainsville

Objectively, Croatia is already following the EU-style economic path. I think even someone who sees little value in economic growth per se would have to admit that the current plan is growing the economy.

Yes, the bubble called GDP is maybe growing...but I don't see this indicator as something "objective" though!

Originally Posted by gainsville

As I said, I think that's something the people can decide.

The political class has already "decided" in our name. The problem is we have one-party system, one and the same party that is formally divided into several "parties", but these are just fractions of one party.

Originally Posted by gainsville

The evidence from the rest of Europe is that countries are willing to undergo social change (maybe even "upheaval") in order to benefit economically.

Yes, there is self-destructiveness at work in other countries, not only Croatia, but it is their matter, I am speaking of Croatia here.

Originally Posted by gainsville

Your job would be, I guess, to convince your countrymen that it's not worth it, or that the perceived benefits are imaginary.

I' ve already convinced some people. There are also many other as myself.

Originally Posted by gainsville

From what I've read of "distributism", I haven't been convinced of the economic case for it. I can't help but feel -- and now I'm getting person, so feel free to hit back -- it suits some, say, city-dweller professional, who is too busy working to really have much time for customs or traditions but he really wants to feel that somewhere out there in the provinces, in some Slavonian village, the traditional way of life is being preserved; naturally, the question arises, if it's so important to him why doesn't he move to the village and live it?

There is a trend of people going to live to villages...

Originally Posted by gainsville

The fact that what the professional really wants is his high paying job, just as the peasant wants the new Audi that his present income can't provide?

They have been brainwashed. They won't have their expensive cars anyway, even if Croatia joins EU. They will just be frustrated.

Originally Posted by gainsville

In this sense, "distributism" to me, and perhaps I'm just not well enough informed about it, seems like another "third way" economic proposal that seeks to deliver economic improvements (ie "growth") without disturbing anything; but to paraphrase what some prominent recent economist said, "everyone wants growth but no one wants change; but you can't have growth without change". With respect to Croatia, I just couldn't see Croats satisfied with sluggish or static growth while all around them economies are booming. If that were to happen, I think you would see widespread dissatisfaction and people would be only too happy to jettison whatever "traditions" distributism was supposed to protect; living better in the here and now being considered more important.

The present economic system fosters dissatisfaction.

Originally Posted by gainsville

This, of course, is the major challenge the EU faces. I'm sometimes ashamed to call myself a liberal given the disasterous stance liberals have taken on this issue. (I'm pretty sure anyone posting on this site would be only too well aware of the immigration issue.) Personally, I'm not against immigration per se. In fact, I'm actually pro-immigration. But I would never stand for anything even close to what is happening at the present.

You are entitled to your opinion.

[Marcus Marulus]

Originally Posted by gainsville

Gay marriage, or at least gay civil union, is something that I feel forced to accept (and promote) on the principle of freedom. It's not an easy thing to do, because I am as repulsed by the thought of gay sex as much as every heterosexual male is.

The modern idea of freedom is a lie. we are not at least free. we are enslaved to Capitalism and our political classes, but on the other hand every day they invent some new "freedom". E. g. you are not able to build a house to live noirmally with your family (because of heavy taxes, etc.), you are not able to live normally from your monthly income, but, hear, hear, you have a freedom for a gay-marriage. I dump these faked freedoms into garbage can. There are real freedoms and artificial needs invented by Capitalism.

As for homosexualism in itself: homosexual practices existed throughout history, in various forms, since time out of mind. But homosexual, gay as identity, as sexual "orientation", is a construct invented by the modern age. There are some people who occasionally indulge in homosexual practices, some of them later abandon it and get married, but there is no such thing as homosexual identity or personality! This thing was invented by the decadent Moronica (America). They were the first ones to invent gays and gay culture (San Francisco), now they others follow in suit, trying to copy this nonsense.

Homosexuals and heterosexuals don't exist, these are societal constructs. There is only a minority of people occasionally indulging in, say, same sex intercourse.

Originally Posted by gainsville

Of course, "denial" or any kind of "thought crime" laws are direct assault on freedom of speech and, really, for anyone who values freedom -- as a liberal is supposed to -- that would be reason enough to reject the EU. What is the general (not the nationalist) feeling in Croatia about such proposals? I find it difficult to imagine Croats being too enthusiastic about laws that would have hauled their former president off to jail.

I am not going to comment here on the late president, because he is not the topic of this thread (besides: he did not deny holocaust). I am against it on grounds of justice. Why should denying persecutions of just one people (Jews) be punishable while denying of mass killings of other people would be allowed. Are Jewish victims more valuable than others? If someone maintained that, it would be Jewish racism.

Originally Posted by gainsville

It's important so that the country's own citizens can keep score. Politicians make sure they take every opportunity to cheat the people, so it's important to minimize the opportunities for cheating. I'm not talking about the details of national security, so there's really not much to worry about with respect to "international control".

European Union is full of corruption. Joining EU won't eliminate corruption. Maybe it will only become more "sophisticated".

Originally Posted by gainsville

Worldwide, the evidence doesn't seem very encouraging that countries without strong democratic traditions feel motivated to do these sorts of things on their own, without external pressure. Now, obviously Croatia isn't Ghana, so maybe it doesn't need EU pressure for this. Still, for all the ills (real and imagined) of the EU, and of post-ww2 liberalism in general, one of the things, in my opinion, that they have got very right are the democratic institutions and procedures they have erected. They might not seem like much to somebody who is more concerned about "nationalist issues", but to me they are some of the oustanding achievements in man's history and, I would say, in moral evolution. Short of the socialist utopia that today only a handful of marxian idealist dream about, this is as good as it gets.

Again: you are entitled to your opinion. I for myself don't believe in moral evolution. There was no and there will be no moral evolution anywhere or anytime. This sounds to me like some kind of Masonic phraseology. Man was always god and bad at the same time, noble and corrupted. The sum of morality remains the same. If you suppress one kind of evils, other kinds come into prominence. That's the way things go in the human history. I do not believe in heavens on earth.
Besides, have you ever heard this joke: "What is democracy? A sanctified right to choose between two dictatorships."

Originally Posted by gainsville

That wasn't the argument. In fact, I made the opposite point: that EU membership would be bad for nationalism. To me, that is a good thing. (Am I permitted to air this view on these boards? I didn't bother to read the rules, figuring that, since this isn't stormfront, opposing views, as long as they are civilly stated, would be permissible.)

You may be surprised to hear this from me, but I don't particularly like nationalism either. A severely ill person may not like the treatment, but it is necessary for his health. So nation is at risk and nationalism is needed to healed. I wish there were no need for nationalism!
I differentiate between jingoism (šovinizam) which is directed towards other nations and is expansionistic and nationalism which is essentially about preserving your own nation and minding your own business.
Nationalism is certainly better than internationalism imposed by America, the number one terrorist state of the world.
For example, there are presently Croatian soldiers in Afghanistan serving interests of America. I as nationalist find it extremely abhorrent. Croatian soldiers have no business there, it is none of our business, no Croatian interests are at stake.

Originally Posted by gainsville

What I also said was that even in current EU countries was that the "totalitarian" nature of the EU is hardening up the nationalists, who seem to be even more extreme than they normally would be. What I meant by this is that even though EU membership works against nationalism -- which to me is a good thing -- it might not be such a good thing afterall because the nationalists are getting even more extreme, and this is causing a great divide in society. I can only see these divides becoming even greater in the next decade, too, especially if the economy goes into recession at some point (which, based on history, it almost certainly will).

God knows what kinds of evils will come out from this mosnster called EU!
Although I am nationalist, I wouldn't like jingoism (I explained the difference above) and territorial pretentions to "harden up" in Europe.
As for economy: the sooner this whole bubble and fake "paradise" called modern economy collapsed, the better for Europe and the rest of humanity.
Maybe many Iraqis and Europeans would be still alive if there was no "modern economy" with the worlds biggest terrorist (USA) enforcing it through mass killings....

Originally Posted by gainsville

Hmm, that sounds a bit extreme, to call such people "scumbags". Afterall, if Croatia is at all similar to the other European countries who joined recently -- and I see no reason to think otherwise -- then obviously you are calling the majority of the people "scumbags".

Brainwashed cretins is maybe better word. It is always minority that cherishes the truth and all too often majority of people in any country falls prey to the disastrous effects of the herd mentality. My motto is: "Uzdaj se u se i u svoje kljuse." My opinion is all talks with EU should be suspended and such thing should not be put on referendum.

Originally Posted by gainsville

At this stage I agree with you that, on balance, Croatia would be better of not joining.

Agreed.

Originally Posted by gainsville

Your own feelings aside, what do you predict will happen?

If the presnet power structures in Croatia nad in the so-called Western world remain intact and in command, our political class will drag us by force into those monsters called EU and NATO. It is as simple as that. I am not sure if I wiill be able to consider Croatia still my country if that happens...because it will be in such a terrible shape...

[Heretik]

I'm pretty much anti-EU but I think we should follow the good sides of their economy, politics etc.
For that, we do not have to be a member of that community.
Especially since we have recently stepped out of one awful... We don't need another one no matter how good it is.

Pozdrav Zrinski!