This is a convoluted way of refusing to answer my final point, perhaps you have no answer. But it nicely serves to prove my other points, so I can't be too annoyed about it.

Viz. the entire EU project is based on a totalitarian ideology that runs like this:

"Most people are stupid, base and racist. Giving them a choice about what happens is therefore very bad. The best social outcomes arise from massive centralisation of power in unchecked bureaucracies."

You are a prime example of this - you just asserted that most people in the UK are racist because they were concerned about the volume of immigration, although the UK is in fact the most ethnically diverse nation in Europe. You have no evidence to support such an astounding generalisation, and race-driven crime is actually very rare there. I mean you'd get a lot further arguing that most Americans are racist, even though that would be an absurd statement too. Polish isn't even a race, Polish people are white!

The reason it's impossible to disentangle loss of sovereignty from the question of who you're losing it to, is because centralisation of power inevitably corrupts people, and therefore who exactly benefits from such a loss is in many ways irrelevant. They'll do things that are at best a good fit for only one section of the population they control, and at worst are just a bad idea for everyone, but the nature of centralised power is that people can do a lot of damage in a short amount of time, and they're less willing to let go of it at the end.

Notice how even the EU's own institutions and biggest supporters are currently up in arms about the Selmayr affair. But who could be surprised, really? It's exactly the behaviour you'd expect to see.