Here in Germany we signed up exactly for that. A Europe with peace and democracy, without borders, countries with political integration, large enough to be heard outside of Europe, ...
The 'common market' was a tool to achieve that. We were also certain that France (and some other countries) also wanted that. Something which was/is very important for us.
Not sure what Britain was and is thinking... but if Britain says they did not know about these goals, then something else went wrong. But that sounds more like internal problems in Britain and has very little to do with the EU or Europe.
I would go so far as to say that no politician in Britain puts forward the case for Europe in these terms. Any pro European argues that it is in our economic interest, and mentions no other advantage. The reason for this is, they could not sell the idea that the European project is decreasing the chances of European war. Indeed, lately, as the popularity of the European project has been diminishing across Europe it looks increasingly as though the main beneficiary of the European project is Germany. Due to the Mediterranean countries keeping the Euro exchange rate low, Germany has benefited from selling it's cheap exports, for years and years. Now that the wheels have fallen off Greece and Spain and Ireland and Portugal those populations look to Germany with envy.
There is a British view, which I am unconvinced of, that the single currency, being done for political rather than economic reasons, has caused, and will continue to cause international European tension.
In short, Britain is not convinced of the economic case, it is not convinced of the moral case, it is not convinced of any benefit whatsoever.
If the Tories win power at the next election outright, which is possible, they have promised an in/out referendum on Europe. If that referendum takes place it is perfectly clear how Britain will vote, they will vote Out.
The German view is that Britain manipulated the financial markets and they fell into their own traps. Instead of setting up a sound economy, Britain lived of North Sea oil, dubious financial 'services' and speculation. But they can't admit that, so they put the blame on somebody else.
Now Britain is desperately seeking for a vision. Is it the revived Commonwealth? Difficult. Though there could be improvements. Britain has a huge trade deficit with India. What else? Is it a form of self-isolation? Alternatively the US could be the best partner and Britain can have a free-trade agreement with the US.
In my view Britain takes itself much too important. From here in Berlin we have many more difficult problems. We just need to look a bit east. Poland is a country which enjoys some growth and it would be much more useful to help them getting into shape and getting them up to the level of Eestern Europe. Even East Germany needs a lot of attention.
As an European, I have to say the EU is a huge success. Much of what I read in the newspapers is bullshit anyway. How often has the British press written that the Euro is over in a few days, survival possibility of a few percent, Germany is already printing Deutsche Marks, and more. Fact is, the Euro is still there, looking stable and the Eurozone is committed to keep it.
Britain may get out of the EU. Scotland may even get out of Britain. The interesting times will be more interesting than some think.
I'm British and mildly pro European, I think for all the stuff that gets written about the EU, for the jokes the countries tell about each other, we have many more things that unite us than divide.
What I can't argue with though, is that there is definitely a perceived democratic deficit in the EU. I won't argue about whether it is real or not, it doesn't matter, what does is a lot of Europeans (not just the British) don't like EU bureaucracy.
Interesting. It has to be remembered that the UK and in fact all the allies, with the partial exception of the Soviet Union, were applying their war efforts to avert precisely this aggregation of nations during the Second World War. That war broke the back of the UK's economy, and the Marshall plan and the post war support of Germany was always intended to be a reintegration of the largest nation in continental Europe into an Anglo Saxon idea of a global economy. It was to avoid a repeat of the decimation of Germany after the First World War, which provided so much impetus to the events leading to the second.
Far from being a mis sold notion to the British public, it was in fact a preferred popular view. The acquiescence of Chamberlain to notions of compromise were well remembered, and the effort and loss of treasure to overcome that mistake gave rise to caution and defensiveness.
Viewed from the German and French perspectives, it appears very differently. But England has a very long history in needing to attend to other nations ideas of supra nationalism as it relates to the British Isles, and its own inclinations to state power inform its decisions as well.
While not my view, to many 'middle englanders', the Franco German alliance is a continuance of historical european politics. The French compromise, with some resistance, and the Germans see Europe as a larger political entity, having the characteristic of land locked imperialists. Even recent diplomats have expressed this view.
The decision to limit the European project to a trading agreement was in the first instance all that could be politically managed in the UK.
The 'common market' was a tool to achieve that. We were also certain that France (and some other countries) also wanted that. Something which was/is very important for us.
Not sure what Britain was and is thinking... but if Britain says they did not know about these goals, then something else went wrong. But that sounds more like internal problems in Britain and has very little to do with the EU or Europe.