cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ca/post/44073775
Today’s numbers reflect a significant change in public opinion on EU accession.
The transition would be minimal. We already adopt EU laws and standards (or their equivalent) in our own laws, we’re a part of ACER, EFTA and Schengen, as well as numerous intelligence and police partnerships. The top leadership of the EU considers the Norwegian sovereign wealth fund a casus belli and is strictly hands off. We’re pretty much all in already, only that we don’t have a seat in the European parliament. I’m struggling to find arguments against membership.
I came here to ask that actually, as someone not very well versed - what would the argument against be
The only arguments against joining the EU I’ve heard so far from staunchly anti-EU people are variations of “we’ll be ruled from Brussels”, “the EU will take all our money”, “we’ll be flooded with foreigners” and “we’ll lose our culture”.
The response to these claims:
We won’t be ruled any more from Brussels than France, Spain or Hungary is. All these countries have their own methods and unique sets of laws you have to familiarise yourself with before moving there. The EU won’t take our money any more than any other member; it’s a mutually beneficial transaction. We’re already a part of the EEA and Schengen so anyone in the EU has the right to live and work in Norway, just as Norwegians enjoy the same rights. I’ve visited most countries in the EU, and can’t say I got the impression that any of their unique cultures were under threat. We stayed in normal residential areas, far from the touristy parts of town, and could clearly see the unique characteristics of each place we went to.
The biggest difference would probably be changing the currency to Euros.