[danmaz74]

If by centralization you mean that more matters are decided at the European level - well, that's the whole point of a Union, and what could prevent "divide et impera" tactics against single states.

On the other hand, if the problem you see is that those matters which are decided at the European level aren't decided in a democratic enough way, then we should push for less power to intergovernmental bodies, more power to the EU Parliament, and the creation of a European public opinion - the last thing we can directly contribute to; we're doing it right now ;)

[lutorm]

I mean both a push to centralize things that really should be left to the countries and a lack of democratic transparency. In Sweden, the debate since back before the referendum in 1994 has been between a "it's better to be on the inside to have influence" on the one side and "it doesn't matter because you have no influence on the inside anyway" on the other. And in the meantime, the lack of democratic transparency has just grown, not become less.

This lack of democracy was generally sold as "don't worry, the EU is just for boring things you the people don't care about anyway, an in either case we have a veto". But now the veto is gone and centralization spreads its tentacles deeper and deeper into national affairs, so that's been a highly disingenuous argument.

[danmaz74]

Exactly, what should be left to the states, and what to the EU? IP regulation, for example, look to me like something that should definitely be euro-wide.