Unpopular Opinion; The EU isn't Communism, its just Capitalism Ripping you off

Since the EU is on fire at the moment as we enter the 3rd week of yellow vest protests, I just thought I'd share my unpopular opinion that, far from the EU being communistic, it is in fact the most rabidly capitalistic system on the face of the earth. In order to understand why, let's observe what the Treaties actually contain and how the European Court has interpreted it.

From the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (Consolidated)

Article 28(1):

The Union shall comprise a customs union which shall cover all trade in goods and which shall involve the prohibition between Member States of customs duties on imports and exports and of all charges having equivalent effect, and the adoption of a common customs tariff in relation to third countries.

Article 34:

Quantitative restrictions on imports and all measures having equivalent effect shall be prohibited between Member States.

Article 36:

The provisions of Articles 34 and 35 shall not preclude prohibitions or restrictions on imports, exports, or goods in transit justified on grounds of public morality, public policy, or public security... Such prohibitions or restrictions shall not, however, constitute a means of arbitrary discrimination or a disguised restriction on trade between Member States.

Now what this means in practice is perfect capitalism; a system free from all but the most essential restraints to unfettered trade. This isn't actually as pleasant as it looks on the outside, as all those French in the streets would probably tell you. The case law bears out that it tends to just ruin things, especially Article 34, which has rather impressively in the case of Commission v France (Foie Gras) forced the French to remove non-tariff barriers to its foie gras market. Is foie gras that big a deal? Does the even smaller Czech foie gras output taste any different? What is the most important feature of foie gras? It's a tiny market, hardly a money maker, but these restrictions were standards on what could be considered foie gras under the trade-name in France.

What if I told you that in Commission v Ireland (Buy Irish) a campaign to convince people to buy domestically produced goods netted the Irish government a fine? Apparently this is a measure with equivalent effect to legislative trade restrictions under Article 34. Is it hate speech against multi-national corporations to say "Buy Irish?" The court hasn't ruled on that yet.

Let's move on to more impressive assaults on something far, far closer to home BEER. What has become of beer under Article 34 of the Treaty? Get ready for this one from Germany (naturelich); Case 178/84 Commission v Germany (Beer) [1987] ECR 1227, which held that drinks made from rice and maize (American corn) could be marketed under the trade description of beer. Also in the Cassis de Dijon case, the court ruled that standards regarding alcohol percent in imported drinks had to be removed. Yes, the EU ruined beer in the name of capitalism. If that were widespread knowledge, maybe the public perception would be different.

So as you can see, the EU system is about free trade, but the question to ask is; why is such free trade is even seen as a benefit? Doesn't removing all these barriers to trade really just leave one with mounds of cheap garbage with low quality control that nobody would buy unless we had these central planners to act as corner-cutters in chief? I think the latter is about right, the EU doesn't deliver prosperity, it delivers consumption, and doesn't much care about what exactly is consumed. It isn't communism, it's capitalism, but it's still producing an 80's Lada because they know that they can rip you off without you noticing too much.