CANZUK Federation - Good idea or thinly veiled white supremacist stuff?

[Ellafan]

Something smells off here. No India, no Kenya etc. No Saffers.

Apart from that, the main problem for CANZUK is that Canadians are shit at rugby and cricket.

I can see no more than a trading block,but the antics of the US and the PRC encourage that.

Here's a link:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=maTAdbfxe-c

[Lemoentjie]

I've seen this movie before...

Good luck to them, it's their decision. They'd be stupid to allow SA to join, unless it was just a trading bloc. Free movement to the UK or Australia for all South Africans?

[Carter's Choice]

I've seen this movie before...

Good luck to them, it's their decision. They'd be stupid to allow SA to join, unless it was just a trading bloc. Free movement to the UK or Australia for all South Africans?

Pretty sure the Australian govt would only let the wealthy South Africans move here. As has been happening since Mandela was elected as President.

[Hugo]

Something smells off here. No India, no Kenya etc. No Saffers.

South Africa have cozied up to China and Russia in BRICS.

[Niegs]

Freedom of movement? Wouldn't we all end up in NZ?

Canada might be the next most popular destination as Brits seem to love it here. Down under neo-hippies love the west coast.

[mat the expat]

Freedom of movement? Wouldn't we all end up in NZ?

Canada might be the next most popular destination as Brits seem to love it here. Down under neo-hippies love the west coast.

I wouldn't mind freedom to go to Canada

[Caley_Red]

This is quite a long standing idea, I recall signing- the only petition I have ever signed- in support of it many years ago, though the petition said that the freedom of movement was going to be restricted to under 40s (at the time).

I would be in favour of it due to the similar p/capita income and wealth, likely that movements would broadly balance out across the 4 countries which would avoid the clear flaw in the EU's freedom of movement. It also has the advantage of a common tongue, similar legal systems and kindred flexible labour markets; unimpeded by excessive protectionist instincts, it would thrive.

[Hugo]

Freedom of movement? Wouldn't we all end up in NZ?

Canada might be the next most popular destination as Brits seem to love it here. Down under neo-hippies love the west coast.

I wouldn't mind freedom to go to Canada

+1.

NZ and Canada are high on my places I'd most like to visit list, possibly one and two. I am tentatively eyeing the Lions tour of 2029 given that my youngest will be finished with school by then and I hope to make it to Canada before that.

[mat the expat]

That would be epic!

My BiL's uncle disappeared after WWII - he was supposed to get on a boat to Canada from Italy.

50 Years later and they found out he got on the wrong ship and ended up in Adelaide! The brother and sister finally met up after all that time.

I was at a funeral last week for a Polish family member - he was born in Germany in a refugee camp. They were supposed to go to Argentina. That was higher on the list than Oz back then. Ended up in Adelaide as well

[Green light echo]

That would be epic!

My BiL's uncle disappeared after WWII - he was supposed to get on a boat to Canada from Italy.

50 Years later and they found out he got on the wrong ship and ended up in Adelaide! The brother and sister finally met up after all that time.

I was at a funeral last week for a Polish family member - he was born in Germany in a refugee camp. They were supposed to go to Argentina. That was higher on the list than Oz back then. Ended up in Adelaide as well

Weren't they lucky and fortunate.....

[Enzedder]

We tried something like that but then that brazen European hussy raised her skirts an inch and the Poms were gone - leaving us and Aussie (and possible the Canuks but not sure about that) to scramble for new markets.

Don't trust them guys

[Paddington Bear]

Broadly a good idea - not sure it needs total free movement given we have enough bar staff and the Aussies have enough surfer bums. Perhaps a guarantee of residency with a job?

Fundamentally all four of us have been reliant on the US alliance and that is becoming less reliable. Between us we've got four developed economies of over 100 million people.

[Enzedder]

The Poms will be back in Europe before the ink is dry on any treaty

[assfly]

Would it be easier to make more use of the Commonwealth than to start a new entity?

[Slick]

Would it be easier to make more use of the Commonwealth than to start a new entity?

We should definitely be doing more with the Commonwealth but I guess the complexities of that organisation make quick and easy wins more difficult. I understand that there are a lot of conversations going around making the Commonwealth work better, but I can't see much happening in the next few years.

[assfly]

We should definitely be doing more with the Commonwealth but I guess the complexities of that organisation make quick and easy wins more difficult. I understand that there are a lot of conversations going around making the Commonwealth work better, but I can't see much happening in the next few years.

The Commonwealth does work, but it's just not very good at marketing itself and showcasing the work it does.

Not taking advantage of existing ties with upcoming powers such as India seems ludicrous to me.

[Ellafan]

Would it be easier to make more use of the Commonwealth than to start a new entity?

No, because of the wide variance in per capita GDP, differing levels of development, etc - the canzuckers seem to be afraid of a mass migration from poorer to richer countries. A sort of economic elitism. If they really wanted to create a federated super power with free movement within the federation, then RSA & India need to be there, with the richer states taking on the federal burden of capital and infrastructure investment, so as to advance their economic development. The whole being stronger than the sum of the parts.

[Slick]

We should definitely be doing more with the Commonwealth but I guess the complexities of that organisation make quick and easy wins more difficult. I understand that there are a lot of conversations going around making the Commonwealth work better, but I can't see much happening in the next few years.

The Commonwealth does work, but it's just not very good at marketing itself and showcasing the work it does.

Not taking advantage of existing ties with upcoming powers such as India seems ludicrous to me.

It works in places, agreed. But given the potential it is really just messing around at the edges and having a nice meeting every few years.

Interestingly, there are a load of African countries currently going through the process of joining, it is obviously still attractive and maybe needs to take this onboard and be more assertive. The reality ot's usually 3rd rate political appointees that get given the top jobs, it needs some real credible leadership.

[assfly]

It works in places, agreed. But given the potential it is really just messing around at the edges and having a nice meeting every few years.

Interestingly, there are a load of African countries currently going through the process of joining, it is obviously still attractive and maybe needs to take this onboard and be more assertive. The reality ot's usually 3rd rate political appointees that get given the top jobs, it needs some real credible leadership.

There is a lot more co-operation that goes beyond CHOGM. But like I said, the Commonwealth's weakness is its publicity and many of these small wins go unnoticed beyond the inner-circle.

The soft-power that the Commonwealth yields is still yet to be fully realised. It is an extremely attractive organisation to be part of, especially as a developing country. It gives state leaders an equal chair at the table that other organisations like the UN don't, which leads to a very different type of politics.

Letting Rwanda join was a good idea in my opinion, but apart from South Sudan I don't see any other African states joining anytime soon.

Agreed about the leadership. I believe great progress was made under Kamalesh Sharma but I'm yet to be convinced by Patrica Scotland. The next SG is going to have to come from outside the UK for credibilty reasons. Similarly, they'll need to think carefully about the next Head of the Commonwealth when Liz pops it.

[sturginho]

It works in places, agreed. But given the potential it is really just messing around at the edges and having a nice meeting every few years.

Interestingly, there are a load of African countries currently going through the process of joining, it is obviously still attractive and maybe needs to take this onboard and be more assertive. The reality ot's usually 3rd rate political appointees that get given the top jobs, it needs some real credible leadership.

There is a lot more co-operation that goes beyond CHOGM. But like I said, the Commonwealth's weakness is its publicity and many of these small wins go unnoticed beyond the inner-circle.

The soft-power that the Commonwealth yields is still yet to be fully realised. It is an extremely attractive organisation to be part of, especially as a developing country. It gives state leaders an equal chair at the table that other organisations like the UN don't, which leads to a very different type of politics.

Letting Rwanda join was a good idea in my opinion, but apart from South Sudan I don't see any other African states joining anytime soon.

Agreed about the leadership. I believe great progress was made under Kamalesh Sharma but I'm yet to be convinced by Patrica Scotland. The next SG is going to have to come from outside the UK for credibilty reasons. Similarly, they'll need to think carefully about the next Head of the Commonwealth when Liz pops it.

Umm, isn't it supposed to be hereditary?

[Slick]

It works in places, agreed. But given the potential it is really just messing around at the edges and having a nice meeting every few years.

Interestingly, there are a load of African countries currently going through the process of joining, it is obviously still attractive and maybe needs to take this onboard and be more assertive. The reality ot's usually 3rd rate political appointees that get given the top jobs, it needs some real credible leadership.

There is a lot more co-operation that goes beyond CHOGM. But like I said, the Commonwealth's weakness is its publicity and many of these small wins go unnoticed beyond the inner-circle.

The soft-power that the Commonwealth yields is still yet to be fully realised. It is an extremely attractive organisation to be part of, especially as a developing country. It gives state leaders an equal chair at the table that other organisations like the UN don't, which leads to a very different type of politics.

Letting Rwanda join was a good idea in my opinion, but apart from South Sudan I don't see any other African states joining anytime soon.

Agreed about the leadership. I believe great progress was made under Kamalesh Sharma but I'm yet to be convinced by Patrica Scotland. The next SG is going to have to come from outside the UK for credibilty reasons. Similarly, they'll need to think carefully about the next Head of the Commonwealth when Liz pops it.

Great post, agree with pretty much all of that.

I know that Senegal and Cote d'Ivoire have really stepped up their efforts to join in the last year - some of this may be to prompt a reaction from France, but it seems genuine from what I hear - and a few others are at an early stage.

Also agree about Scotland, she is too matey with the usual hangers on in the UK to make a difference IMO, and yes, needs to be from outside the UK next.

EDIT - and Angola fairly advanced.

[Lemoentjie]

We tried something like that but then that brazen European hussy raised her skirts an inch and the Poms were gone - leaving us and Aussie (and possible the Canuks but not sure about that) to scramble for new markets.

Don't trust them guys

The Poms left their childhood sweetheart for a younger, fancier girl closer to home. Now they realise their mistake and they go crawling back to the first woman

[Mahoney]

Similarly, they'll need to think carefully about the next Head of the Commonwealth when Liz pops it.

Umm, isn't it supposed to be hereditary?

Nope, there's no requirement that it be the monarch of the UK. The Queen, and before her George VI, were given it as part of the transition from Empire to Commonwealth.

In 2018 the heads of government agreed that Charles would become Head of the Commonwealth when the Queen dies.

[Paddington Bear]

It works in places, agreed. But given the potential it is really just messing around at the edges and having a nice meeting every few years.

Interestingly, there are a load of African countries currently going through the process of joining, it is obviously still attractive and maybe needs to take this onboard and be more assertive. The reality ot's usually 3rd rate political appointees that get given the top jobs, it needs some real credible leadership.

There is a lot more co-operation that goes beyond CHOGM. But like I said, the Commonwealth's weakness is its publicity and many of these small wins go unnoticed beyond the inner-circle.

The soft-power that the Commonwealth yields is still yet to be fully realised. It is an extremely attractive organisation to be part of, especially as a developing country. It gives state leaders an equal chair at the table that other organisations like the UN don't, which leads to a very different type of politics.

Letting Rwanda join was a good idea in my opinion, but apart from South Sudan I don't see any other African states joining anytime soon.

Agreed about the leadership. I believe great progress was made under Kamalesh Sharma but I'm yet to be convinced by Patrica Scotland. The next SG is going to have to come from outside the UK for credibilty reasons. Similarly, they'll need to think carefully about the next Head of the Commonwealth when Liz pops it.

Umm, isn't it supposed to be hereditary?

It isn't but as I understand it they have agreed Charles will be next.

IIRC a lot of countries like the Commonwealth as an international summit where the Americans aren't invited.

[assfly]

Umm, isn't it supposed to be hereditary?

Yes but that's something they might need to look at, for purposes of credibility and relevance. It should go to Charles, but I personally would like to see it go straight to William for him to champion for years to come. Otherwise another option could be to do away with the head or restructure it so that the head is elected democratically.

Great post, agree with pretty much all of that.

I know that Senegal and Cote d'Ivoire have really stepped up their efforts to join in the last year - some of this may be to prompt a reaction from France, but it seems genuine from what I hear - and a few others are at an early stage.

Also agree about Scotland, she is too matey with the usual hangers on in the UK to make a difference IMO, and yes, needs to be from outside the UK next.

EDIT - and Angola fairly advanced.

Not sure if I'd agree with having such a strong Francophone influence. They don't present strong cases for shared history and culture in my opinion.

Angola is also a bit iffy for me, but considering Mozambique are long standing members they could be considered.

I'd like to see Zimbabwe invited back, of which I'm sure conversations have already been had. But given that a military coup seems around the corner again i don't see that happening.

[shereblue]

Canzuk seems to be veering off into the Commonwealth. Fact is that it is very hard to create these entities. The youtube clip talks of "working, living and travelling seamlessly between Canzuk nations". It licks it lips at the combined military might of the nations. Has the UK not just left a Union complaining about infringement of sovereignty, judicial oversight, free movement, a Euro Army? There is a good cultural link but the UK is just casting about desperately at the moment for white friends. Canz would be better. You lot don't want a flood of impoverished, unemployed Brits swamping your cities.

[Hugo]

That would be epic!

My BiL's uncle disappeared after WWII - he was supposed to get on a boat to Canada from Italy.

50 Years later and they found out he got on the wrong ship and ended up in Adelaide! The brother and sister finally met up after all that time.

I was at a funeral last week for a Polish family member - he was born in Germany in a refugee camp. They were supposed to go to Argentina. That was higher on the list than Oz back then. Ended up in Adelaide as well

Interesting, apparently all roads lead to Adelaide.

My Grandad's brother also ended up in Adelaide, served in the British army in WW2 then after the war joined the Australian army and I think spent the rest of his working life in it.

[mat the expat]

That would be epic!

My BiL's uncle disappeared after WWII - he was supposed to get on a boat to Canada from Italy.

50 Years later and they found out he got on the wrong ship and ended up in Adelaide! The brother and sister finally met up after all that time.

I was at a funeral last week for a Polish family member - he was born in Germany in a refugee camp. They were supposed to go to Argentina. That was higher on the list than Oz back then. Ended up in Adelaide as well

Interesting, apparently all roads lead to Adelaide.

My Grandad's brother also ended up in Adelaide, served in the British army in WW2 then after the war joined the Australian army and I think spent the rest of his working life in it.

Interesting isn't it?

It does get a lot of bad press but it's a fabulous place to bring up a family - and now, the nightlife and amenities is really good

[assfly]

Canzuk seems to be veering off into the Commonwealth. Fact is that it is very hard to create these entities. The youtube clip talks of "working, living and travelling seamlessly between Canzuk nations". It licks it lips at the combined military might of the nations. Has the UK not just left a Union complaining about infringement of sovereignty, judicial oversight, free movement, a Euro Army? There is a good cultural link but the UK is just casting about desperately at the moment for white friends. Canz would be better. You lot don't want a flood of impoverished, unemployed Brits swamping your cities.

Self-interest will always win.

[Green light echo]

Canzuk seems to be veering off into the Commonwealth. Fact is that it is very hard to create these entities. The youtube clip talks of "working, living and travelling seamlessly between Canzuk nations". It licks it lips at the combined military might of the nations. Has the UK not just left a Union complaining about infringement of sovereignty, judicial oversight, free movement, a Euro Army? There is a good cultural link but the UK is just casting about desperately at the moment for white friends. Canz would be better. You lot don't want a flood of impoverished, unemployed Brits swamping your cities.

100%. Piss the Brits off. What have they ever done for us.

They should realky be ashamed of themselves, but of course they aren't....

[Slick]

Canzuk seems to be veering off into the Commonwealth. Fact is that it is very hard to create these entities. The youtube clip talks of "working, living and travelling seamlessly between Canzuk nations". It licks it lips at the combined military might of the nations. Has the UK not just left a Union complaining about infringement of sovereignty, judicial oversight, free movement, a Euro Army? There is a good cultural link but the UK is just casting about desperately at the moment for white friends. Canz would be better. You lot don't want a flood of impoverished, unemployed Brits swamping your cities.

100%. Piss the Brits off. What have they ever done for us.

They should realky be ashamed of themselves, but of course they aren't....

Nope.

[Paddington Bear]

Canzuk seems to be veering off into the Commonwealth. Fact is that it is very hard to create these entities. The youtube clip talks of "working, living and travelling seamlessly between Canzuk nations". It licks it lips at the combined military might of the nations. Has the UK not just left a Union complaining about infringement of sovereignty, judicial oversight, free movement, a Euro Army? There is a good cultural link but the UK is just casting about desperately at the moment for white friends. Canz would be better. You lot don't want a flood of impoverished, unemployed Brits swamping your cities.

Not that I imagine you're massively interested or would agree, but it is possible to see comparing the two as you have done as very much apples and oranges.
There aren't all that many genuine isolationists, and if you do accept the need for international cooperation it does not necessarily follow that:
1) It needs to be focussed on the EU 27
2) That it must take the form of the EU

For example, a CANZUK agreement doesn't necessarily need to have EU style freedom of movement to be successful.
Similarly, it seems fairly self-explanatory that an agreement with a smaller number of nations with very similar systems of government and cultures that we shape from the beginning may well prove more popular than one we failed to join and shape from the start.

As for the search for white friends - why do you think we joined the EU in the first place? As Edgerton put it in The Rise & Fall of the British Nation - one of the great modern histories of 20th Century Britain, our political class realised it had to choose between a black Empire/Commonwealth and a white Europe and considered it a no-brainer.

[Ellafan]

As for the search for white friends - why do you think we joined the EU in the first place? As Edgerton put it in The Rise & Fall of the British Nation - one of the great modern histories of 20th Century Britain, our political class realised it had to choose between a black Empire/Commonwealth and a white Europe and considered it a no-brainer.

No foresight, really.

[Paddington Bear]

As for the search for white friends - why do you think we joined the EU in the first place? As Edgerton put it in The Rise & Fall of the British Nation - one of the great modern histories of 20th Century Britain, our political class realised it had to choose between a black Empire/Commonwealth and a white Europe and considered it a no-brainer.

No foresight, really.

If you drove through Slough c.2000 and drove through Slough today post Eastern European accession to the EU you would certainly notice a significant difference...

[shereblue]

Canzuk seems to be veering off into the Commonwealth. Fact is that it is very hard to create these entities. The youtube clip talks of "working, living and travelling seamlessly between Canzuk nations". It licks it lips at the combined military might of the nations. Has the UK not just left a Union complaining about infringement of sovereignty, judicial oversight, free movement, a Euro Army? There is a good cultural link but the UK is just casting about desperately at the moment for white friends. Canz would be better. You lot don't want a flood of impoverished, unemployed Brits swamping your cities.

Not that I imagine you're massively interested or would agree, but it is possible to see comparing the two as you have done as very much apples and oranges.
There aren't all that many genuine isolationists, and if you do accept the need for international cooperation it does not necessarily follow that:
1) It needs to be focussed on the EU 27
2) That it must take the form of the EU

For example, a CANZUK agreement doesn't necessarily need to have EU style freedom of movement to be successful.
Similarly, it seems fairly self-explanatory that an agreement with a smaller number of nations with very similar systems of government and cultures that we shape from the beginning may well prove more popular than one we failed to join and shape from the start.

As for the search for white friends - why do you think we joined the EU in the first place? As Edgerton put it in The Rise & Fall of the British Nation - one of the great modern histories of 20th Century Britain, our political class realised it had to choose between a black Empire/Commonwealth and a white Europe and considered it a no-brainer.

I am greatly in favour of international co-operation and closer CANZUK co-operation is an excellent idea. I believe there is a matchless cultural proximity. Co-operation was already there within our EU membership, with Five Eyes and so on.

This thread started however with the idea of an alternative body and even rival to the EU. That just seems like a tiresome and ultimately unrealisable distraction given the strident opposition to shared sovereignty demonstrated by the newly purged Conservative Government. And I'm not sure to what extent our CANZ cousins want this anyway.

Would the idea be that some sort of "white" drawbridge be raised (hard lines, India, South Africa) and would we stand shoulder to shoulder with Canada against US bullying as we saw with Trump's ripping up of NAFTA? Would the UK welcome migrating aboriginals from Oz and refugees from a more welcoming Canada? And what is this combined military might talked up, what's it for, over and beyond NATO? I'm not sure why the UK would want to shape CANZ, let alone be shaped by them.

If we are to be part of an entity then my view has always that in political and trade terms, despite its limitations, the EU covers our backyard and shared history. The Thatcher-driven expansion from the 6 member states we joined has helped change the map of Europe since the Cold War, Franco, the Colonels and such like and is a stronger bulwark against US, Russian and Chinese weight throwing.

So yes to increased co-operation with CANZ (and the Commonwealth) and yes to a more positive approach to co-operation with the EU.

[Caley_Red]

Canzuk seems to be veering off into the Commonwealth. Fact is that it is very hard to create these entities. The youtube clip talks of "working, living and travelling seamlessly between Canzuk nations". It licks it lips at the combined military might of the nations. Has the UK not just left a Union complaining about infringement of sovereignty, judicial oversight, free movement, a Euro Army? There is a good cultural link but the UK is just casting about desperately at the moment for white friends. Canz would be better. You lot don't want a flood of impoverished, unemployed Brits swamping your cities.

Not that I imagine you're massively interested or would agree, but it is possible to see comparing the two as you have done as very much apples and oranges.
There aren't all that many genuine isolationists, and if you do accept the need for international cooperation it does not necessarily follow that:
1) It needs to be focussed on the EU 27
2) That it must take the form of the EU

For example, a CANZUK agreement doesn't necessarily need to have EU style freedom of movement to be successful.
Similarly, it seems fairly self-explanatory that an agreement with a smaller number of nations with very similar systems of government and cultures that we shape from the beginning may well prove more popular than one we failed to join and shape from the start.

As for the search for white friends - why do you think we joined the EU in the first place? As Edgerton put it in The Rise & Fall of the British Nation - one of the great modern histories of 20th Century Britain, our political class realised it had to choose between a black Empire/Commonwealth and a white Europe and considered it a no-brainer.

I am greatly in favour of international co-operation and closer CANZUK co-operation is an excellent idea. I believe there is a matchless cultural proximity. Co-operation was already there within our EU membership, with Five Eyes and so on.

This thread started however with the idea of an alternative body and even rival to the EU. That just seems like a tiresome and ultimately unrealisable distraction given the strident opposition to shared sovereignty demonstrated by the newly purged Conservative Government. And I'm not sure to what extent our CANZ cousins want this anyway.

Would the idea be that some sort of "white" drawbridge be raised (hard lines, India, South Africa) and would we stand shoulder to shoulder with Canada against US bullying as we saw with Trump's ripping up of NAFTA? Would the UK welcome migrating aboriginals from Oz and refugees from a more welcoming Canada? And what is this combined military might talked up, what's it for, over and beyond NATO? I'm not sure why the UK would want to shape CANZ, let alone be shaped by them.

If we are to be part of an entity then my view has always that in political and trade terms, despite its limitations, the EU covers our backyard and shared history. The Thatcher-driven expansion from the 6 member states we joined has helped change the map of Europe since the Cold War, Franco, the Colonels and such like and is a stronger bulwark against US, Russian and Chinese weight throwing.

So yes to increased co-operation with CANZ (and the Commonwealth) and yes to a more positive approach to co-operation with the EU.

Is it possible to extract yourself from the Brexit prism through which you see all else? The thread did not start with the idea being a rival to the EU but rather deepening existing ties to countries with whom there's a deep historical relationship as well as a shared language and similar institutions.

[Jock42]

Canzuk seems to be veering off into the Commonwealth. Fact is that it is very hard to create these entities. The youtube clip talks of "working, living and travelling seamlessly between Canzuk nations". It licks it lips at the combined military might of the nations. Has the UK not just left a Union complaining about infringement of sovereignty, judicial oversight, free movement, a Euro Army? There is a good cultural link but the UK is just casting about desperately at the moment for white friends. Canz would be better. You lot don't want a flood of impoverished, unemployed Brits swamping your cities.

Not that I imagine you're massively interested or would agree, but it is possible to see comparing the two as you have done as very much apples and oranges.
There aren't all that many genuine isolationists, and if you do accept the need for international cooperation it does not necessarily follow that:
1) It needs to be focussed on the EU 27
2) That it must take the form of the EU

For example, a CANZUK agreement doesn't necessarily need to have EU style freedom of movement to be successful.
Similarly, it seems fairly self-explanatory that an agreement with a smaller number of nations with very similar systems of government and cultures that we shape from the beginning may well prove more popular than one we failed to join and shape from the start.

As for the search for white friends - why do you think we joined the EU in the first place? As Edgerton put it in The Rise & Fall of the British Nation - one of the great modern histories of 20th Century Britain, our political class realised it had to choose between a black Empire/Commonwealth and a white Europe and considered it a no-brainer.

I am greatly in favour of international co-operation and closer CANZUK co-operation is an excellent idea. I believe there is a matchless cultural proximity. Co-operation was already there within our EU membership, with Five Eyes and so on.

This thread started however with the idea of an alternative body and even rival to the EU. That just seems like a tiresome and ultimately unrealisable distraction given the strident opposition to shared sovereignty demonstrated by the newly purged Conservative Government. And I'm not sure to what extent our CANZ cousins want this anyway.

Would the idea be that some sort of "white" drawbridge be raised (hard lines, India, South Africa) and would we stand shoulder to shoulder with Canada against US bullying as we saw with Trump's ripping up of NAFTA? Would the UK welcome migrating aboriginals from Oz and refugees from a more welcoming Canada? And what is this combined military might talked up, what's it for, over and beyond NATO? I'm not sure why the UK would want to shape CANZ, let alone be shaped by them.

If we are to be part of an entity then my view has always that in political and trade terms, despite its limitations, the EU covers our backyard and shared history. The Thatcher-driven expansion from the 6 member states we joined has helped change the map of Europe since the Cold War, Franco, the Colonels and such like and is a stronger bulwark against US, Russian and Chinese weight throwing.

So yes to increased co-operation with CANZ (and the Commonwealth) and yes to a more positive approach to co-operation with the EU.

For missions that are in the interests of the 4 but outside NATO, similar to the new biational UK/French brigade about to come into force.

[shereblue]

Not that I imagine you're massively interested or would agree, but it is possible to see comparing the two as you have done as very much apples and oranges.
There aren't all that many genuine isolationists, and if you do accept the need for international cooperation it does not necessarily follow that:
1) It needs to be focussed on the EU 27
2) That it must take the form of the EU

For example, a CANZUK agreement doesn't necessarily need to have EU style freedom of movement to be successful.
Similarly, it seems fairly self-explanatory that an agreement with a smaller number of nations with very similar systems of government and cultures that we shape from the beginning may well prove more popular than one we failed to join and shape from the start.

As for the search for white friends - why do you think we joined the EU in the first place? As Edgerton put it in The Rise & Fall of the British Nation - one of the great modern histories of 20th Century Britain, our political class realised it had to choose between a black Empire/Commonwealth and a white Europe and considered it a no-brainer.

I am greatly in favour of international co-operation and closer CANZUK co-operation is an excellent idea. I believe there is a matchless cultural proximity. Co-operation was already there within our EU membership, with Five Eyes and so on.

This thread started however with the idea of an alternative body and even rival to the EU. That just seems like a tiresome and ultimately unrealisable distraction given the strident opposition to shared sovereignty demonstrated by the newly purged Conservative Government. And I'm not sure to what extent our CANZ cousins want this anyway.

Would the idea be that some sort of "white" drawbridge be raised (hard lines, India, South Africa) and would we stand shoulder to shoulder with Canada against US bullying as we saw with Trump's ripping up of NAFTA? Would the UK welcome migrating aboriginals from Oz and refugees from a more welcoming Canada? And what is this combined military might talked up, what's it for, over and beyond NATO? I'm not sure why the UK would want to shape CANZ, let alone be shaped by them.

If we are to be part of an entity then my view has always that in political and trade terms, despite its limitations, the EU covers our backyard and shared history. The Thatcher-driven expansion from the 6 member states we joined has helped change the map of Europe since the Cold War, Franco, the Colonels and such like and is a stronger bulwark against US, Russian and Chinese weight throwing.

So yes to increased co-operation with CANZ (and the Commonwealth) and yes to a more positive approach to co-operation with the EU.

Is it possible to extract yourself from the Brexit prism through which you see all else? The thread did not start with the idea being a rival to the EU but rather deepening existing ties to countries with whom there's a deep historical relationship as well as a shared language and similar institutions.

If you'd recalled the very start of the CANZUK link under discussion, you'd have heard it described as a "project name" for an "economic and political union" that had previously been "made impossible by EU membership". So that is the prism of the link under discussion.

I didn't refer baldly to CANZUK as a "rival" but as an "alternative and even rival". Perhaps "competitor" would have been fairer.

Thus whilst I approve of bilateral and even multilateral CANZUK military operations, alongside other bilaterals within a NATO and UN framework, The attempts in the link to make a CANZUK Union look massive in size is what I had in mind when using the "even rival" description. Of course multilateral CANZUK military exercises seem promising but the link was boasting of the "union's" joint 280,000 military personnel and its combined budget of $101 bn. It was further boasting of its landmass, its massive population, its combined economy and ranking the CANZUK Union in comparison to the USA, the EU and China.

You may not share my views but at least reflect on what the Link was actually promoting and how the Link connected Brexit with its CANZUK "Union" idea.

[Paddington Bear]

Canzuk seems to be veering off into the Commonwealth. Fact is that it is very hard to create these entities. The youtube clip talks of "working, living and travelling seamlessly between Canzuk nations". It licks it lips at the combined military might of the nations. Has the UK not just left a Union complaining about infringement of sovereignty, judicial oversight, free movement, a Euro Army? There is a good cultural link but the UK is just casting about desperately at the moment for white friends. Canz would be better. You lot don't want a flood of impoverished, unemployed Brits swamping your cities.

Not that I imagine you're massively interested or would agree, but it is possible to see comparing the two as you have done as very much apples and oranges.
There aren't all that many genuine isolationists, and if you do accept the need for international cooperation it does not necessarily follow that:
1) It needs to be focussed on the EU 27
2) That it must take the form of the EU

For example, a CANZUK agreement doesn't necessarily need to have EU style freedom of movement to be successful.
Similarly, it seems fairly self-explanatory that an agreement with a smaller number of nations with very similar systems of government and cultures that we shape from the beginning may well prove more popular than one we failed to join and shape from the start.

As for the search for white friends - why do you think we joined the EU in the first place? As Edgerton put it in The Rise & Fall of the British Nation - one of the great modern histories of 20th Century Britain, our political class realised it had to choose between a black Empire/Commonwealth and a white Europe and considered it a no-brainer.

I am greatly in favour of international co-operation and closer CANZUK co-operation is an excellent idea. I believe there is a matchless cultural proximity. Co-operation was already there within our EU membership, with Five Eyes and so on.

This thread started however with the idea of an alternative body and even rival to the EU. That just seems like a tiresome and ultimately unrealisable distraction given the strident opposition to shared sovereignty demonstrated by the newly purged Conservative Government. And I'm not sure to what extent our CANZ cousins want this anyway.

Would the idea be that some sort of "white" drawbridge be raised (hard lines, India, South Africa) and would we stand shoulder to shoulder with Canada against US bullying as we saw with Trump's ripping up of NAFTA? Would the UK welcome migrating aboriginals from Oz and refugees from a more welcoming Canada? And what is this combined military might talked up, what's it for, over and beyond NATO? I'm not sure why the UK would want to shape CANZ, let alone be shaped by them.

If we are to be part of an entity then my view has always that in political and trade terms, despite its limitations, the EU covers our backyard and shared history. The Thatcher-driven expansion from the 6 member states we joined has helped change the map of Europe since the Cold War, Franco, the Colonels and such like and is a stronger bulwark against US, Russian and Chinese weight throwing.

So yes to increased co-operation with CANZ (and the Commonwealth) and yes to a more positive approach to co-operation with the EU.

Interesting post.

Addressing a few points:
1) The "white drawbridge". I think firstly it is inaccurate to describe particularly Britain, Canada and Australia as 'white' countries in 2020.
Second, of course there are some who'd never have, say, India involved for reasons we are well aware of.
However, there are clear practical reasons for this as well - one of the reasons CANZUK could work in practice is the similar levels of GDP per capita, quality of life etc. I doubt even with very lax immigration policies between the four you would see a depopulation like what has happened in parts of Eastern Europe. There's little doubt I think that British toleration of the EU began to end when countries joined with a wildly different standard of living.
2) Shared history. Life is all about perspective - it is exactly this that means I favour CANZUK. Each to their own but I suspect your average Brit has stronger ties to particularly Australia than to the Continent.
3) Stronger bulwark. Undoubtedly. However I don't accept that the British national interest on say, Russia, is aligned with many of the EU27. Same applies to the US, CDG was right on that at least. Broadly I think that the CANZUK nations have significantly less divergence regarding what is in our interests, which balances out the lower level of clout.

[Enzedder]

You'll never get the Aussies to treat their Kiwi sub-class equally.