The poor old EU has once again had it's statist ambitions quashed, this time by upstart, and economic powerhouse, Ireland. On this side of the pond, schoolchildren are presented with the notion that the EU is just Europe's plan for becoming a United States of Europe. This insidious argument bears little resemblance to the truth. left wanting is the argument that the US system of government is one that governs from the bottom up and what the Euros are pursuing is strictly a top-down affair. Disparate groups from Welsh coal miners to Dutch tulip growers are having none of it despite their governments best efforts to eliminate themselves and, if not the nationalist impulse, the nationalist necessity.
Apparently not the consensus of the rest of Europe's leaders, Idiens. I'm not sure that the Irish will be alone in this or that a second vote will much change the Irish outcome. It failed by a pretty good percentage.
As far as I'm aware the treaty has a clause in it that requires those who reject it to leave the Union and revert to associate membership.
So, Ireland will be asked to vote again and must decide whether or not they wish to be part of the EU.
From an outsiders perspective it seems to me that the EU is a good thing for Europe even though it is massively flawed in various areas.
Should Britain and Ireland leave the Union as well they might, I hardly think that would sound the death knell of the EU, indeed with the increase in membership post the collapse of the USSR one wonders if anyone would really notice.
__________________
Greatness is not where we stand, but in what direction we are moving....we must sail, sometimes with the wind, sometimes against it, but sail we must, and not drift nor lie at anchor.- Oliver Wendell Holmes
And here's how it's being perceived on this side of the pond: washingtonpost.com
We wrestled with local v centralized control when we were setting up this country and found it a polarizing discussion ... and we DIDN'T have hundreds of years of history behind each independent state.
It's an unaccountable cabal, nominally answering to the people, but in reality run by unelected Eurocrats.
The French and the Dutch rejected out of hand this crap, and it was re-badged "not a constitution" and put back on the rails again.
The British wanted a chance to reject the constitution... and it was promised to them by Slippery Brown.... but it was re-badged "not a constitution" and the vote was sneakily avoided.
The authour, D'Estang, said that both documents... apart from the page numbers and the colour of the cover... were essentially the same, but the Eurocrats claim otherwise. They know more than the authour after all.
How convenient.
The Irish, who had to vote as it was in their constitution, threw it out.
Man, isn't it interesting that of the three countries that had a referendum on this issue, all of them rejected it.
Put it to the Irish again and they will kill it again. This is not the Nice treaty after all, this is "not a constitution", and they have seen it as such.
How they insult the people with this talk of second voting. They talk of the Irish holding the rest of Eurpoe "to ransom". Let's ask the whole of Europe next time, and not just the Irish, or is that not democratic enough?
In the meantime, the British parliament plan to proceed with ratification of this non-constitution. Don't ask the British. Of course not. They'd slaughter it.
How they take the will of the people as an unwelcome distraction.
By their own rules, they have got to ditch this "non-constitution".
The rules will get ditched now.
And when they do, the gap between the people and this cabal will grow ever-wider.
One of the wonderful thing about EU treaties is that nobody reads them, most especially those who are passionately against the EU. Yet they claim on great authority that they need to vote (against) what ever it is that is written in them.
The same site has the previous treaties - which the nay sayers believe to be in some way "better" and worthy of keeping or not changing. Rockter - have a read, see what you are objecting to.
The opponents of the EU also say that the EU is not transparent, they know that because they have never read any of the treaties, or the stream of other publications the EU puts out in a desperate attempt to explain itself.
They blame the EU for incompetence, but struggle against any attempts to improve it.
They blame those "grey men in suits" in Brussels for all their woes, not knowing where their woes come from, but objecting to having their woes removed, while forgetting that the "suits" in Brussels are their own elected politicians.
They like to blame the European Commission for enacting the regulations that their own elected ministers and parliamentarians have voted for.
The great thing about the Lisbon Treaty is that it makes the EU more democratic and provides for a member state to leave, should it choose to do so.
In my opinion, as European, it was easy to advance in the widening commonly regulated aspects (mainly economic, with little relevance in the "identity" matters, if any at all) but the process of construction Europe is approaching the point where it will have to be decided where sovereignty rests: either in the individual country members or in the Union. There can no be ambiguous answers to this question (just like a woman can not be "just a little bit pregnant"). Country members can keep making little assignments of power bits to the EU, but down the road they will have to face the big question.
And are the country members ready to harakiri themselves to allow the birth of a European nation? Huge NO! None of them is! At least so far. Even Spaniards (who did vote "Yes" to the so-called "European Constitution" referendum in February 2005) will take their word back when one day they realize what it implies to their XVII Century imperialistic mentalities.
Europe realizes that the only big step forward possible is passing a Constitution, but it it impossible because the member countries refuse to dissapear. Solution: let's agree a new treaty and call it a "Constitution". You would like to have a boat and sail in the seas but can't afford it? No problem, call your Chevrolett "a boat" and call riding it in the highways "sailing". So on Mondays you will be able to tell your workmates that you spent the weekend sailing on your sailboat. But you will know that was not sailing, just like that treaty was no constitution.
Now they don't call it a constitution anymore but obviously, it still gets the same rejection...
If we want a real EU in the future we should start preparing ourselves for the big issue: are you ready to see your old country fade away within the European Union? Anything else is just beating around the bush.
Last edited by Harvester : 06-16-2008 at 12:48 AM.
Harvester - my view is that the document should never have been given the pompous title of a constitution - that was an ego trip for G. D'estang - it is another treaty.
As I read it, the major changes are intended to reduce the effects of kind of bickering that prevented Europe from intervening in the Yugoslavia as it bloodedly tore itself apart. It introduces democracy into the Council to reduce its despotic activities. Plus it provides for member states to withdraw, which significantly preserves their sovereignty.
The majority of the changes are trying to fix issues that have occurred due to limitations in the previous treaties' texts, especially with 27 countries now involved instead of 15. Whether they will be useful or effective will remain to be seen in 2015, should the Lisbon treaty come into force.
What part of sovereignty do you value most? - See if there is anything in the treaty that challenges it.
to read this one would think the EU is an abject failure. but somehow the yooropeans have a currency worth about 50 percent more than the dollar. they must be doing something right???
__________________
SailorMitch
Sailing winged keels since 1989. 1.20.09 Bush's last day the end of an error !! Hopefully we still have a constitution and economy left by then.
"Compassion and tolerance are not a sign of weakness, but a sign of strength." The Dalai Lama
good planets are hard to find-- a song by steve forbert
I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided, and that is the lamp of experience. I know no way of judging the future but by the past.-- Patrick Henry.
Linear Mode
