Following on from questioning whether Passports are Racist, I look at the EU, a grouping of countries who share more than just geographic proximity. Once a country becomes a member, its citizens are free to move, live and work anywhere in the EU.

Let’s ask a searching question about EU membership by comparing two past applicants. One of them was accepted, the other was not.

Applicant A Applicant B
Distance to Maastricht treaty member 19km 210km
Inflation rate 2.32% 7.71%
Unemployment rate 2.1% 3.6%
Median age 24.7 37.3
Population density 71 93.1
Free market reform since 1976 1989
Democracy since 1956 1989
Religious freedom since 1912 1960
Colour of people ??? ???

Which would you have chosen, given those statistics? Naturally, B, the one with rampant inflation, an aging population, high unemployment, relative overcrowding and which is a long way from any core EU country?

Foreground: Spain (EU); Background: Morocco (denied membership)

Foreground: Spain (EU); Background: Morocco (denied membership)

That’s right, that is exactly what Europe decided on. Romania is now an EU member state; whilst Morocco’s 1987 application was rejected for being ‘insufficiently European‘.

What does that really mean? To me, that is pure racial discrimination. Remember that Turkey and large parts of southern Spain have far closer cultural ties with Morocco than they have with Germany.

Is there a real reason other than disguised racism for denying Morocco entry whilst allowing Serbia, Romania and Turkey?

Could it really be that the racist leaders of EU member states are unwilling to allow Moroccans to benefit from the EU purely because they are not white? Could the EU which is happy to admit people from so many states really not want to allow this country with mostly non-white people in it to gain the freedom to live, move and work in EU member states?

Do you agree and feel that the EU is institutionally racist? Have I got the wrong end of the stick?

Comments particularly welcome!

Bookmark and Share