The European Union is built with a few very libertarian principles at its core, nestled in between many other anti-liberty positions.
 
Foremost amongst these scattered libertarian principles is the freedom of movement of goods and individuals; that is to say, a lack of restrictive measures along the borders of the member nations designed to limit the transfer of people and/or products from one territory to an another.
 
However, in reality, while much lower than in the past, these restrictions have not entirely disappeared as a result of the establishment of the European Union. Indeed, most border stations have been largely or at least partly abandoned or demolished, but only to be replaced by patrolling border police and customs officers that may stop anyone at random.
 
Rather than forcing governments to abandon their checks and laws on which goods or individuals may enter or leave their respective countries, the EU has transferred this authority to itself under the guise of a great liberator. Now, instead of a great big competition of many different sets of movement laws which impact their enforcing countries’ economies and development either positively or negatively depending on whether they are freer or not respectively, we have a standardised, only quasi-free (relative to the immediate pre-EU situation, but totally unfree if compared to average standards 150 years ago) and centrally decided set of laws, which affect every country equally and are getting worse every year, now that there is virtually no competition.
 
We must face the fact that no matter what it declares its principles to be, the larger and more centralised and monopolising a government is, the lesser the liberties of those who live under it. We must also remember that liberty of movement and trade can not be granted by a government, it already exists in our natural human state and can thus only be limited or forbidden by a government.
 
Yes, there are goods and individuals who can, ‘thanks’ to the establishment of the EU, cross borders, where such a crossing might have been disallowed 50 or 60 years ago. But this not to the EU’s merit, it is only a testimony of the reprehensible policies of the politicians of the time, of whom many and their successors have joined the central planning authority of the EU. In fact, the EU itself is not any less protectionist than some of the most trade-restrictive countries within it were before its inception – goods and individuals coming from outside the EU must face many checks, tariffs and ordeals before being allowed entry.
 
This is why, if you are an advocate for freedom of movement and/or trade in Europe, you should currently be campaigning for your country to leave the EU, and ultimately, for the dissolution of this monstrous entity. Although it is true that this might result in less freedom of movement and trade at least at first, either because of inner protectionism coming from your politicians, or blockades from the ever-so hypocritical remainder of the European Union – on the long term, neither of these possibilities can last, as they are not economically sustainable for anyone, especially not the EU and its growing debts.
 
If you don’t trust your politicians to keep borders open for goods or individuals, how can you trust an even greater number of politicians, most of which are even less likely to ever have to personally face your disapproval, anger and dissent and that of your compatriots? In the long run, secession is the type of political action that will most easily be associable with increased levels of freedom – and the first step is secession from the EU.