First Brexit, Now Poexit

First Brexit, Now Poexit

In light of recent controversial legal reforms, Poland has two options: face the consequences, or get out.

Poland may soon follow Britain's footsteps in departing the European Union. The premise for a possible Poexit surfaced after the nation had received sanctions from the European Commission (the EU's main administrative entity) due to recent controversial judicial reforms that occurred in the land.

The European Commission has stated the rightwing government's proposed legal reforms would introduce a "clear risk of a serious breach in the rule of law". Frans Timmermans, vice president of the European Commission, also voiced his concern over Poland's legal route. Timmermans stated the 13 laws embraced by the legal system over the past two years had made it so the Polish government "can systematically politically interfere with the composition, powers, the administration and the functioning" of the judiciary.

Despite the European Commission's sanctions, Polish Newspaper Gazeta Wyborcza claims the ruling party views these dealings as an "opportunity to spread dissatisfaction with the EU among Poles," and is "calling the European Commission's bluff." Poland's leadership is allowed to have their opinion, nevertheless, many state a Poexit would be catastrophic for the nation. As a result of Poland's actions, the country may face Article 7 of the Union Treaty, an article that would impose a consequence severe in political nature: Poland would be effectively stripped of its voting rights. Even Rzeczpospolita, a Polish Newspaper that often displayed its favor of the current government, has stated the present state of affairs is a fast car "speeding towards a wall for months now and has finally spectacularly crashed into it," and further stated that invoking Article 7 against Warsaw is "the first stone that could start an avalanche of catastrophic consequences" for Poland.

According to German Newspaper Süddeutsche Zeitung, "after Brexit, a Poexit could be the final consequence." The newspaper further stated that "if the majority in Poland no longer wants to abide by the law, then the country has to leave the EU. After Brexit, the EU could soon experience its next big tragedy. The country is likely to be as divided as the British before the Brexit decision."

Another German Newspaper Die Welt chimed in and labeled the European Commission's potential activation of Article 7 as the "nuclear option." Die Welt further stated that "never before has the strongest weapon in the EU's treaty been activated. If this happens, it will become painfully clear that the EU is, in fact, almost defenseless if a member state persistently refuses to obey." Lawyer Thomas Giegerich also relayed his opinion to Die Welt, claiming that "If Poland had not already been an EU member, it would not have been accepted at the moment."

In support of Poexit is Hungary, which stated it would veto any efforts of the EU to halt Poland from voting in Brussels. Balazs Hidveghi, press chief of Hungary's ruling Fidesz party, relayed a message to Magyar Hirlap Newspaper that the European Commission's action against Poland is "proof of Brussels' efforts to punish the countries that oppose the settlement of migrants in Europe and the mandatory resettlement quota scheme." Hidveghi also firmly stated that "Hungary rejects the EU's way of using legal procedures for exerting political pressure."

So the question remains: will Poland's government face the consequences it has brought onto itself? Or will pressure from the European Union soon prompt a Poexit? For now, the world will have to wait in see. However, one thing is for certain: the possibility of a Poexit is becoming more and more of a reality by the second.

Cover Image Credit: Politico

Popular Right Now

An Open Letter to the Person Who Still Uses the "R Word"

Your negative associations are slowly poisoning the true meaning of an incredibly beautiful, exclusive word.

What do you mean you didn't “mean it like that?" You said it.

People don't say things just for the hell of it. It has one definition. Merriam-Webster defines it as, "To be less advanced in mental, physical or social development than is usual for one's age."

So, when you were “retarded drunk" this past weekend, as you claim, were you diagnosed with a physical or mental disability?

When you called your friend “retarded," did you realize that you were actually falsely labeling them as handicapped?

Don't correct yourself with words like “stupid," “dumb," or “ignorant." when I call you out. Sharpen your vocabulary a little more and broaden your horizons, because I promise you that if people with disabilities could banish that word forever, they would.

Especially when people associate it with drunks, bad decisions, idiotic statements, their enemies and other meaningless issues. Oh trust me, they are way more than that.

I'm not quite sure if you have had your eyes opened as to what a disabled person is capable of, but let me go ahead and lay it out there for you. My best friend has Down Syndrome, and when I tell people that their initial reaction is, “Oh that is so nice of you! You are so selfless to hang out with her."

Well, thanks for the compliment, but she is a person. A living, breathing, normal girl who has feelings, friends, thousands of abilities, knowledge, and compassion out the wazoo.

She listens better than anyone I know, she gets more excited to see me than anyone I know, and she works harder at her hobbies, school, work, and sports than anyone I know. She attends a private school, is a member of the swim team, has won multiple events in the Special Olympics, is in the school choir, and could quite possibly be the most popular girl at her school!

So yes, I would love to take your compliment, but please realize that most people who are labeled as “disabled" are actually more “able" than normal people. I hang out with her because she is one of the people who has so effortlessly taught me simplicity, gratitude, strength, faith, passion, love, genuine happiness and so much more.

Speaking for the people who cannot defend themselves: choose a new word.

The trend has gone out of style, just like smoking cigarettes or not wearing your seat belt. It is poisonous, it is ignorant, and it is low class.

As I explained above, most people with disabilities are actually more capable than a normal human because of their advantageous ways of making peoples' days and unknowingly changing lives. Hang out with a handicapped person, even if it is just for a day. I can one hundred percent guarantee you will bite your tongue next time you go to use the term out of context.

Hopefully you at least think of my friend, who in my book is a hero, a champion and an overcomer. Don't use the “R Word". You are way too good for that. Stand up and correct someone today.

Cover Image Credit: Kaitlin Murray

Related Content

Connect with a generation
of new voices.

We are students, thinkers, influencers, and communities sharing our ideas with the world. Join our platform to create and discover content that actually matters to you.

Learn more Start Creating

News Flash: 'Building The Wall' Is Still A Dumb Idea And Always Will Be

The government is still partially shutdown because of funding for the wall. Really?


A man who is a strong supporter of building the wall told me this metaphor: If you don't want the wrong people walking into your backyard, you put a fence up. We don't want the wrong people coming to America, so we put a wall up. I respect people's political beliefs, and because of this, I want to share mine.

I believe that President Trump demanding money to build a border wall is dumb.

It's hard to believe so many people really think that this "build a wall" has everything to do about border security. It's just inhumane and wrong.

Literally, the most notorious drug lord of Mexico has shed light about how he smuggles the drug into the U.S. They have brought it through fishing boats, trucks going through the legal point of entry, underground tunnel, but not through unwalled parts. The half of million pounds of narcotics that were secured at the border? They were all al legal points of entry.

I'm saying this because I am a proud daughter of immigrants who crossed the border. The media has portrayed immigrants as these horrible people infiltrating our country. They just want somewhere safe to live to raise their kid.

The conditions of Latin American countries are inexplicable. Communist have risen from the ashes dominating these countries letting people rot on the street starving. There are little to no job opportunities. I haven't seen my family in three years because it is dangerous to go.

The media doesn't tell you this. They don't tell you how many people have gone to the border and returned to Mexico because ICE agents tear gas them.

They tell you that they throw babies over fences to distract border patrol agents. They tell you children are dying because of malnutrition of trekking thousands of miles to get the border. They don't tell you that those same children have been eating unmonitored food with thousands of microorganism some mal some good.

Not all immigrants are not bad people. The notions that all immigrants are criminals is "fake news." It has been a hook, line, and sinker for the Republican Party. There are studies such as one from the journal Criminology showing that places with high undocumented immigrant population does not equal high crime.

Should undocumented citizens attempt to become legal residents of the United States? Absolutely, and that is a problem if they are evading taxes and other legal notions with more consequences.

However, we should not lie to ourselves and act as a wall is to help border security against drugs and crime. It's just a physical quota like 1920s immigration laws. There is a better solution then sacrificing 5.7 billion dollars. Let me translate that: 5,700,000,000 dollars. That is our taxes. As a college student, I rather have those 5.7 billion dollars be translated to scholarship, grants, financial aid, and helping us, the future of this country become the best people we can be. Why build a wall when the future of America, who I personally think is more important can be helped.

I don't come from a rich family, and I don't have the means to afford a college education without loans, so when I hear that the Government can afford to give 5.7 billion dollars for a wall, I have the right to be upset. Tell me I'm wrong, and call me dumb, but this is my unpopular opinion.


Related Content

Facebook Comments