A bitter irony

[Charlemagne]

The idea of a constitution for the European Union would seem to be a very good idea. With all of the overlapping treaties among the member states a single document that streamlines and consolidates things could only help the EU. Right? At least, that's what many people smarter and more powerful than I believe. Unfortunately, as in any large -- or in this case, continent-spanning -- venture, in attempting to satisfy everyone one ends up satisfying no one. Some countries say they stand to lose too much power, for others the issue is cheap labour undercutting their workforces.

Today I watched as the French people delivered a stinging rebuke to their leader by voting "non" in a binding referendum on the treaty to establish the new constitution. The acrimonious debate shown on the CBC over the last two days revealed some of the country's less-than-savoury aspects. In one interview an irate and xenophobic Frenchman raged that if the treaty was ratified "Turkey would join the EU and the Muslims would take over". Nonetheless, does this mean that Europe's grand experiment in democracy for the 21st century is over for the forseeable future? As I understand it, for the document to become law it must be ratified by all countries, and it is a bitter irony that one of the EU's founding members has become the first to reject the treaty establishing its constitution.

What does this mean for all the other countries planning referenda? The Netherlands is holding its referendum later this week, but does France's decision render it and all the other ones meaningless? I'm curious to hear what European members think of the constitution. Are you for it? Against it? Afraid you might lose your job because of it?

[Gronagor]

Well... at this moment I think it is a bad idea. But it is inevitable.

[Angelus3K]

I think the UK will most likely vote NO, I mean we dont even have the freaking Euro!!!

I prefer the £ though so thats probably why lol

[Klytos]

I think the new constitution is shit. I wouldn't want to hand over my countries rights. Europe isn't one country, it's a union of many countries.

[Gronagor]

I'm curious what the US has to say about this. If this goes through in some miraculous way, the EU would soon be a Superpower. That would start a new interesting chapter in the history books. We'll see...

[Erpy]

I'm still rather divided about it, mostly because it's difficult to get a clear view of the whole thing. The "constitution" isn't a simple document like the US-constitution...it's a tome of hundreds of pages that's supposed to unite a bunch of countries who, unlike the US' separate states, have no single national identity. I've missed out on a large part of the latest hype, due to my stay in the US for nearly a month, but we're being bombarded with tons of "advice" from all political ends of the spectrum and most people probably don't know what to make of it.

I don't see the EU becoming a superpower in the near future, btw. I can see it holding its own economically, but the EU spends far too little money on military stuff to become a military superpower. And the EU certainly isn't politically united.

[Da_elf]

im not sure i would care what US has to say about all of this. seeing as how this is not their country involved and they have no rights to say anything. of course everyone is entitled to their oppinion. thank goodness everyone is also entitled to give two hoots about someones oppinion (politeness is what makes us give two hoots usually though)

[Brainiac]

im not sure i would care what US has to say about all of this. seeing as how this is not their country involved and they have no rights to say anything. of course everyone is entitled to their oppinion. thank goodness everyone is also entitled to give two hoots about someones oppinion (politeness is what makes us give two hoots usually though)

I agree with Da_elf; our government has no right to influence the internal decisions of the Union.  Whatever their individual nations choose to do is what they choose to do.  In my opinion, more international unity is a good thing, but that's all it is - an opinion.

[PotatoSlayer]

The US has a lot to say in this matter...all countries do.  This could effect a lot of things(trade, currency exchange, etc.).  The Us is a world power so why should they stay out of world affairs?

[PValiant]

My vote will clearly be in favour of the EU constitution. I really like things to happen more smootly at an european level, cancelling the veto right currently available for every country. Plus i see tje constitution as a next step to a true Union, which could economically be a strong block, although i agree with Erpy on the lack of military power even in the next decades.

The thing that really annoys me is the fact that they are holding referenda to make this important decision. Its for a reason we favour representative democracy over true democracy. We choose a representative to take the time and specialize him or herself in the political matters. Non specialists will not have the time to make a weighed decision on such a specialized and difficult issue.
I'm not even talking about the fact that mass crowds of people can easily be manipulated to make the wrong decision.

That said, i do hope my fellow dutchmen will make the right choice and thats a yes

[Charlemagne]

But will it mean anything? Does the Dutch electorate's opinion even matter now that France has said no? I thought that a single country voting not to ratify the treaty would kill it. Also, are you voting in a binding referendum or is it merely consultative?

[Spikey]

First of all, this is not about the Euro. Second, I think "constitution" is a wrong word for this. All the referendums will turn out "no", cause the whole "European Constitution"  thing is framed as a destruction of nationality, so misinformed people (mainly by the media) see it as a threat to their national identity.

The most important thing to me is that we could fight terrorism more efficiently if the constitution gets through. Economically it will have advantages as well. Economy pressures politics to make quick decisions, and economy pressures education, science and technology to be transparent and swift. We will see this improved. I will vote yes, not because I am no great patriot (cause I am no great patriot), but because of the advantages.

Spikey

[Angelus3K]

Like Charlie says, I doubt the whole thing will go through now as France have voted NO.

I bet the UK votes NO too. Just because the people are too arrogant and want to be their own nation and have their own laws etc

[Gronagor]

The US has a lot to say in this matter...all countries do.  This could effect a lot of things(trade, currency exchange, etc.).  The Us is a world power so why should they stay out of world affairs?

Good point. Then I guess China also has a big say in this.
Heck... the NKoreans have all americans quivering for some reason, so I'd say that makes them a power as well! Let them vote!  :p

[Erpy]

The US has a lot to say in this matter...all countries do.  This could effect a lot of things(trade, currency exchange, etc.).  The Us is a world power so why should they stay out of world affairs?

Likewise, I'm still wondering why the heck I didn't get a voting ballot during the US presidental elections. The election of the US government affects nearly every citizen on the planet, so why the heck could only those select few living in the US decide who gets to sit in the White House?

(If you need me to elaborate more on why the US or any other non-European country has no official say in these matters, let me know.  )

[Blackthorne519]

Look,  the US rules, you all drool, so get in line to kiss my feet, or my fearless leader (Bill Gates) will smite you.





Bt

[Pidgeot]

I'm not really sure what I should vote myself. Although I do see the benefits of having a combined constitution, I've heard that it strongly limits how much each nation has a say in, even for things on a national level.

Of course, there would likely be made various exceptions for each country, but it's still hard to know. I suppose it's a good thing that Denmark isn't voting until September 23rd.

[Klytos]

Just because the people are too arrogant and want to be their own nation and have their own laws etc

I don't think it's got anything to do with arrogance. I personally have a lot of pride in my country and I wouldn't want to see my sovereign laws overridden by elected representitives from other countries. And I think this is something that a body like the EU is going to do. I hate that Australia has ratified so many stupid UN treaties telling us what we can and cannot do. We have the right to charter our own destiny, as does any country on the planet. France included.

[fluxmaster]

I'm curious what the US has to say about this. If this goes through in some miraculous way, the EU would soon be a Superpower. That would start a new interesting chapter in the history books. We'll see...

I think that the context of the question is what the US has to say about loosing its status as the sole superpower.  Of course, the US has no say in the matter; each European country has the soverign right to decide its own destiny.

But if each of the European countries, in exercising it soverign rights, decides to form a political union and challenge the US position as the sole superpower, then I think that it would be good for the US and good for the world.  As an American, I don't think our position as the sole superpower is good for us or for the world; too much of our resources are wasted fighting useless wars that alienate the rest of the world against us.  And, if I could select the entity that I would like to become the second superpower, I could think of no better choice than the European Union.  Think of how the world was when the Soviet Union was the other superpower.  Think of how the world will be if some other country assumes the power of the other superpower.  Although China as the other superpower would be better than Russia, I think that the European Union would be the best choice for other superpower.

In one interview an irate and xenophobic Frenchman raged that if the treaty was ratified "Turkey would join the EU and the Muslims would take over".

I think that the "irate and xenophobic" Frenchman raised a valid point.  The influx of masses of Muslims would radically change European culture, and I don't think for the better.  In fact, much of Eurpoean history has consisted of wars to keep Muslims out of Europe.

Preserving one's culture is one of the reasons that we have countries and laws keeping foreigners out.  If that is "xenophobic," then to avoid "xenophobia" we would have to permit anyone to live in any country he wishes, which would, in effect, mean the end of the culture of any country who practiced it.

I am not advocating the return of the state religion.  People who are already citzens of a country ought to be able to practice their religion so long as it does not cause harm to others.  But I think that it is reasonable and necessary to consider religious and cultural issues in formulating immigration policy and in deciding whether a country should give up its soverignty to a larger entity and with which other countries it should share its soverignty.

[Angelus3K]

Dont get me wrong Kyltos, I'm one of the arrogant ones lol I wanna keep the British Pound, never used a Euro in my life till I went to Amsterdam and I was sure I was paying about £10 for a cup of coffee lol

[Brainiac]

Look,  the US rules, you all drool, so get in line to kiss my feet, or my fearless leader (Bill Gates) will smite you.

There is no more frightening idea than that.

[Vildern]

I don't have a say in this discussion(not in Europe), but:

I wouldn't want to hand over my countries rights. Europe isn't one country, it's a union of many countries.

Gee, whatever happened to the statement you supported "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few".  :p  I guess in real life these pretty words don't mean much.

[Spikey]

I think this thing is kind of pulled out of proportion. It's not like we're becoming one country or anything. The European Union is already a superpower on it's own, politically as well as economically; the EU is responsible for almost 40% of the world trade (Germany about 10%, France about 6%, the Netherlands & United Kingdom about 5% each, Italy & Belgium about 4% each, and the remaining countries taken together another 8% or so). There are only two other countries with a higher share than 4%; the USA is responsible for 12% and Japan for 10%. All the other countries in the world are below 4%, just as an idication for the international economical power of the EU, with or without the constitution.

[Charlemagne]

In one interview an irate and xenophobic Frenchman raged that if the treaty was ratified "Turkey would join the EU and the Muslims would take over".

I think that the "irate and xenophobic" Frenchman raised a valid point.  The influx of masses of Muslims would radically change European culture, and I don't think for the better.  In fact, much of Eurpoean history has consisted of wars to keep Muslims out of Europe.

Preserving one's culture is one of the reasons that we have countries and laws keeping foreigners out.  If that is "xenophobic," then to avoid "xenophobia" we would have to permit anyone to live in any country he wishes, which would, in effect, mean the end of the culture of any country who practiced it.

I am not advocating the return of the state religion.  People who are already citzens of a country ought to be able to practice their religion so long as it does not cause harm to others.  But I think that it is reasonable and necessary to consider religious and cultural issues in formulating immigration policy and in deciding whether a country should give up its soverignty to a larger entity and with which other countries it should share its soverignty.

I think you might have misunderstood me. I didn't mean to imply that controlling immigration is necessarily a bad thing. It's just that the way the man was ranting on TV made it pretty clear he's a bigot. I could imagine him walking down the street with some friends pointing and muttering: "Goddamn foreigners. Coming here and stealing our jobs."

However, it's true that in most of Europe the birth rate among non-immigrant families has fallen below the replacement rate while immigrants -- often Muslim families from North Africa -- tend to have large families. Autochthonous Europeans have legitimate concerns about immigration making them minorities in their own countries.

[Quest For Glory Fan]

The US has a lot to say in this matter...all countries do.  This could effect a lot of things(trade, currency exchange, etc.).  The Us is a world power so why should they stay out of world affairs?

Likewise, I'm still wondering why the heck I didn't get a voting ballot during the US presidental elections. The election of the US government affects nearly every citizen on the planet, so why the heck could only those select few living in the US decide who gets to sit in the White House?

(If you need me to elaborate more on why the US or any other non-European country has no official say in these matters, let me know.  )

to Potato Slayer I completly disagree, although America can have all the opinion it wants they shouldn't have a say at all if (like erpy said) Europe never gets a say in America. Although what I'm not understanding is why everyone else is so flustered to me it's not a big a deal as most people make of it. Being a neutral Canadian observer I don't have even an opinion as to what EU should do although to me it seems as if no one there likes it

Quick Note: Angelus why do you like the pound so much more than other currency? Is it simply because you grew up with it? to be honest I think the metric system is the best just because it's so simple. Can you tell me how many feet are in a mile? I can tell you how many meters are in a kilometer. and there's 100cents in one dollar and hell if I know how the pounds work. Celsius to Farenhiet?....I won't start that. Grams to pounds now true I tell people my weight is 120pounds but that's only cause no one knows what 55kg means.