It's obviously well past your bedtime young man.

There are Irish politicians and elected representatives who believe in the so called "Left-Wing Exit (Lexit). There is an opposition to the type of Brexit that is happening, namely a Tory one, but that doesn't mean the ultimate shared goal of departing from the EU, or weakening it, are not shared by people on the left and right. The only show in town in terms of EU disintegration is the Brexit spearheaded by a Tory Government, and supported by people who support them, and to a further extent the UKIPPer type. But if offered a Brexit deal, on the back of a Labour spearheaded campaign, there are a lot of people who oppose Brexit in its current form, that would change their tune very quickly. Newt mentioned Greece in a previous post. Its worth digging around about the people screeching about the EU's final deal with Greece in 2015, and how they saw the EU as a massive problem, as opposed to a fiscally irresponsible member state that thought it would stick two fingers up at the rest.

The left and right wing opposition to the EU is often used as an example of the dubious "horseshoe theory", the outcome would indeed be the same, but the left and right oppose the EU for very different reasons.

With our geographic location beside the Brits, I'm a lot more comfortable with Ireland in the EU than if we were out of it. 

To put it as simply as is not possible to be ignored: Ireland's far better off in the European Union, but we cannot claim the moral high ground about our past history when our present is benefiting solely on the basis of geographical location and being a member of a project that turns a blind-eye to our taxation system while simultaneously punishing former colonies for similar tax independence.

Spending more  on migration controls than helping vulnerable people, people who are fleeing from weapons made by EU member states is racist.

That's concrete and nothing to do with member states, but the central EU treasury. 

The EU went after Ireland on tax, but it refuses to deal with several Caribbean countries for what it sees as  tax abuses. It refuses to deal with certain Caribbean countries due to corruption, but deals with and through London and Amsterdam. It deals with Saudi Arabia, but not Trinidad. 

Again, nowhere did I mention or imply a 'United States of Europe'. It is another example of you choosing what you are arguing against. The EU, not individual members, has done the above. If you inferred it that is your problem; you're arguing with yourself, albeit you're correct in suggesting that arguing against it strengthens the case for it. As an internationalist, I'm not against any pan-national project in theory, but globalisation leaves me cynical.

It has made little or no criticism of individual members who still benefit from colonialism, but criticises small, poor black majority island states to the point of refusing to trade with them for far less.

It rightly criticises Russia,and occasionally China, stopping short of doing anything, but has it ever criticised France's behaviour in Africa? There is barely a mention of individual state's arm sales. Has anyone criticised an independent report released this week into German arm sales to Saudi Arabia? Do you think they will? 

Yet the punish non-members for far lesser crimes because they can. It is bullying, and the bullying of states based on their ethnic majority is racism.

You can still believe in the overall good of the project; you can say, as was rightly mentioned above, that Ireland's geographical location means it provides security. My basic argument is still that it makes more sense to be critical, and indeed outright against, the EU from the left than the right. Those who are truly against it on the right, and understand it, are nearly all in it for personal gain, by then convincing those who are struggling financially that waving a flag will make everything better. That is unquestionably a swindle. But Euroscepticism is perfectly understandable from a Marxist perspective, given the above ideology and theory that is imposes by the parliament in Brussels. 

You say the EU is "blacklisting countries" because of tax yet simultaneously say its because they have a majority black population, all while admitting they used their limited powers to go after Ireland on tax.

Sorry, but this is bullsh*t narrativising. You could just as easily use a bad faith narrative to say that any campaign against what Saudi Arabia or China do is "racist". 

Amazingly enough  the EU tends to look out for the interests of its members vis a vis non-members. If  a non-member is doing something it perceives as harmful to its members, it can act how it wants as regards the non-member. That's global trade. But, conversely, globalisation is not going away. Globalisation is a function of technology. Wishing it away will not work. 

Saudi Arabia has massive global power because it has masses of oil. Sorry to break it to you. Yes, they are scumbags, but they literally have us over a barrel. The best way to curb and ultimately destroy Saudi Arabia's power over other countries (and this goes for Russia too) is for the world to transition to a green economy, and the EU is our friend if we are ever to do that.

The EU is very imperfect. It is also a product of who people elect in different countries. You make it better by electing better people. 

Want to stop arms sales to sh*tty countries? Start electing people who will make it an issue, support grass roots civil society activist campaigns that will make it an issue. Shaming countries who do so is the only way to do this. The EU doesn't have competency to stop Germany or Sweden or the Brits selling arms. Does it have the competency to shame countries? Yes. Again, that's a function of who we elect.

Change is piecemeal and a f**king grind, and because there are hundreds of millions of people in the EU, there are a lot of people with different views to you or me. Change only happens by organisation to change opinions, to persuade. It doesn't happen overnight.

Lexit, for any country, is a fantasy. 

With respect, that's a load of claptrap.