The Irish have Europe's future in their hands

[Skybird]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/jun/11/ireland.eu

This letter could have been written by me.

I was surprised by your leader on Ireland's vote on the Lisbon treaty (June 7), particularly the line: "An Irish yes would be an enlightened act." Enlightenment is thin on the ground here; banal advertising campaigns bombard the electorate with the message "Get the complete picture", while our politicians - who all, except for Sinn Féin, implore us to vote yes - admit they haven't read the treaty. Indeed Ireland's EU commissioner, Charlie McCreevy, proudly declared that no sane person would want to.

A cursory glance at the treaty shows it to be impenetrable and virtually impossible to understand. The proposed amendment to Ireland's constitution is equally meaningless. Ireland's Referendum Commission, which was created to offer an unbiased assessment of referendums, talks of many unknowns with Lisbon. Truly, nobody knows what might happen if it is ratified. The treaty's one nod to participative democracy - as opposed to the failed representative democracy which has brought us to this point - is a citizen's initiative process, whereby a million EU citizens can bring forward a topic for discussion in the European commission. Yet even this potential vote winner is just a fuzzy proposal.

Ireland is in a unique and historic position as the only country required to ratify Lisbon with a democratic vote. Should a population of just 4.5 million really hold back the will of 480 million? Given the unknowns, indeed the unknowables, in Lisbon's serpentine text, Ireland has a duty to vote no on June 12. Then the EU must work to address the democratic deficit which lies at the heart of its problems. And then all the EU citizens must have their say.

Very well said. Just where he takes "the will of the 480 million" as granted to be in favour of Lesbon, allows criticism, but probably is not intended, but comes by not taking enough care with wording. 480 million were not asked, as a matter of fact.



This is not just another of the many daily political minor decisions, this is basic, most essential, substantial, extremely important stuff that potentially affects our lives in the future fundamentally. In other words: it is far too important to leave it to politicians who want to support their career because they have not understood that the time of life-long power and aristocratic governing the people from the top are usually considered to be over. Something so basic and essential should not become valid without a clear and strong majority of the citizens of people in european nations are accepting it. So far we only have seen tricks and cheats of the top estaiblishement to keep them away from voicing there criticism and dissatisfaction and disturbing the harmony of the leaderships.

And if France'S Kouchner already has sent angry threats to kick Ireland out of the Eu if they do not vote like they are demanded to do, then this shows an interesting understanding of what freedom of political choosing, and demcoracy is about. Kouchner obviously thinks that people should only be allowed to make a choice if they will choose what they are commanded to choose.

A No tomorrow will trigger a crisis for the EU, yes. but it is a desperately needed, necessary, healthy crisis, offering the chance to become clear about some very serious distortions and deeformations that have accumulated over the past 15 years and so far just get ignored and covered up.

"Coming to your senses" on my mind.

[asanovic7]

I don't know about your countries, but here in Croatia every darn politician is fighting and stating that eu is blessing from heaven.. Now, my voter's or whatever you call it, right that I can tell to other people what I want would (and will) be tested by some policeman who would want to pass me "his" will with a, how do you call it, we call it pendrek, stick.. Anyways, this whole darn world looks to me like 1984. from orwell, so who cares.. What democracy and freedom are you talking about when you have 2000 cameras in the centre of the town, 20000 policemen, 2000000 laws telling you this and that, 2000000000 shop malls where they throw food... Democracy and freedom are rather a fiction in the movies about william wallace and such.. When people figure out why fight club is a good movie, then things will be good..
:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:
Whoever said history repeats itself. Roman empire, huh? Maybe when Croats get in, oh will you ever let us in? :rotfl: we all will have an emperor, don't know about you, but I will call him adolf..
Cheers!
p.s. one more thingy.. I sort of notticed that eu is nothing more than a toy in russians hands.. Energy issues? :rotfl:

[joegrundman]

There is valid criticism of the treaty and the constitution and the way it is being challenged, without it meaning that the EU project itself is unwanted

The EU is an overwhelmingly good thing for every member state (and it is not a toy in russia's hands - it is a big player, but there are other big players, and you have to do business with them)

But the rejection of the treaty by France and the Netherlands, even if motivated by other domestic political factors (as is widely believed), should be grounds for rewriting the constitution.

For sure, the constitution of a project like the EU should be something believable and understandable and in someway inspiring, and not some piece of impenetrable legalistic-beaurocratic jargon that as the Irish minister says: no sane person would want to [read], and in general i agree it is time the EU became more directly democratic.

But how does one do that in an organisation that is still less than even a confederacy? If one is to accept the principle that the nation state members of the EU are the supreme entities, rather than the federal structure itself - then what is wrong with saying your elected governments have the right to handle the EU as they agree?

If on the other hand, the European populace was to directly vote for the EU government, then the EU government will be given a mandate and power base that is independent of the governments of the member nation states. By doing this you are creating a stronger european "center" and heading in the direction of a federal structure more like that of the USA.

[kurtz]

Originally Posted by Skybird

. Should a population of just 4.5 million really hold back the will of 480 million?

This smacks of 'bringing democracy to your country'
If 4.5 milllion people in one country don't want the governments of 480 million people want them to have then surely that's fair enough. I mean if russia had enough people and their government wanted us to have thier laws should we have them?

I think not

[Tchocky]

grundman, you make too much sense .

It can't be a flowing, inspiring document, because it changes existing modes rather than establishes new ones.

The bookies have Yes winning, I just can't wait for it to be over. The Yes campaign has shown ineptitude beyond belief, whereas the No side have outdone themselves in vacuous stupidity yet again. I;m not too enamoured with the average voter, either. On the train today there was lots of talk of "kicking this useless governmenr where it hurts". I'd almost agree, just to see some retribution for the idiocy of putting this to referendum, but it's in the bleedin' Constitution.
I have to spend some time in Dublin city centre tomorrow morning, not looking forward to it.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by kurtz

This smacks of 'bringing democracy to your country'
If 4.5 milllion people in one country don't want the governments of 480 million people want them to have then surely that's fair enough. I mean if russia had enough people and their government wanted us to have thier laws should we have them?

I think not

Context please. In reality I exactly said pretty much the opposite of what you give it a twist to appear as. Also, it is a quote from that letter, and not a quote by me.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by joegrundman

There is valid criticism of the treaty and the constitution and the way it is being challenged, without it meaning that the EU project itself is unwanted

The EU is an overwhelmingly good thing for every member state (and it is not a toy in russia's hands - it is a big player, but there are other big players, and you have to do business with them)

But the rejection of the treaty by France and the Netherlands, even if motivated by other domestic political factors (as is widely believed), should be grounds for rewriting the constitution.

For sure, the constitution of a project like the EU should be something believable and understandable and in someway inspiring, and not some piece of impenetrable legalistic-beaurocratic jargon that as the Irish minister says: no sane person would want to [read], and in general i agree it is time the EU became more directly democratic.

But how does one do that in an organisation that is still less than even a confederacy? If one is to accept the principle that the nation state members of the EU are the supreme entities, rather than the federal structure itself - then what is wrong with saying your elected governments have the right to handle the EU as they agree?

If on the other hand, the European populace was to directly vote for the EU government, then the EU government will be given a mandate and power base that is independent of the governments of the member nation states. By doing this you are creating a stronger european "center" and heading in the direction of a federal structure more like that of the USA.

Good thoughts. It is clear that if it ever is to become a Confederation (but who ever said it should? Just twenty years ago, nobody said so), then chnaged condition necessarily will go at the costs of condtions of today'S status quo. You cant get something new and nevertheless stick with the old in totality. that is clear.

But the question is not wether or not such a thing, or a union, should be tried, the question is about the quality of the effort, and the honesty of intention behind it. The original treaty is not so much my concern. But it is to difficult to understand, and if even many poltiicians do not care to read it (and thus ratify it withiout knowing hwat it is they are ratifying), then the whole operation starts running under a bad starsign already, also, later bad surprises canot be ruled out. and finally, if the EU rerally is for the citizens and not for the corporations only, on something so fundamental like a constitution (and mind you: the Lisbon treaty keeps the key parts of the constitution draft), those for whose benefit it is claimed to be should have been heared and their acceptance should be secured. I think, that acceptance by majority is in no way a given fact throughout Europe. I would even say that you need a 2/3 majority for such a huge thing, you do not want to run it with a majority of just 51:49 - which effectively means to have half the European citizens uninterested, or against you.

that the structures of the EU and the office levels that form the really powerful decisions, that work out new directives and guidelines that then are mandatory to be formed into valid laws in nations without these nations being free anymore to change or refuse them, the growing gap between the power-waging bureaucracy, and the citizens - ironically exactly what the treaty claims to reduce in width, but you take from mywords that I see that different - all this additonally helps to prevent to coinvince me that the way the EU is planned to be in this treaty, is desirable, and "for the people".

However, the tricky things in my opinion lie in the appendices of the treaty (boshe moi, there are even politicians in germany not knowing that the treaty has appendices, can one believe it...), where certain more reality-related issues are getting touched that have more direct implications to our political culture, our freedom to form opinions and to voice criticism, also our freedom to be against something and to reject what is alien. Talking of indirect imp0lications that will have - and already have - massive consequences on the way we form our "Geisteslandschaft". Unlimited, indifferentiating tolerance is hereby declared mandatory, which means you also cannot defend the nature and essence of what you consider to be yourself and your home and culture, since for that the existence of borders that define what is "you" and what is no more you, is a necessary precondition. I see a trend in the EU to neutralize tradiiutonal cultural difefrences between regions and people in europe anyway, and to erazse the differences you see when travelling thropugh europe, and which gives europe it's charm, but people for the most take only note of it when a story like the EU planning to ban for example a French camembert from selling or shepards in the high Alpes needing to desinfect the natural water their sheep are drinking since cneturies jump into newspapers headlines. These stories are curiosities, but the general massive trend underneath that sometimes creates also such stories - that is the underlying current that I see and that I am so bitterly against. This is not becasue my quarrel with Islam alone, although the way the Islam debate is handled by the EU is a most popular symptom.

and finally I am convinced that the EU already is far to big, and has expanded far to fast, and is accepting cnadidates that by all reason at the time they joined should not have been allowed to join. And when yesterday I read in a German online newspaper that a German politician said about the possibility of the irish saying No, that that would be bad because it would not allow the EU to speed up the joining process "of the new EU members", then I can only shake my head about so much incompetence and lacking sense of reality and infantile desire to ride with a neck-breaking speed. The EU runs by the motto bigger is better, and it puts - as to be seen in the ratification procedures that exclude the voice of the european citizens - quantity above quality.

Well, I see that exactly the other way around.

Whatever the rish vote will be, I think that in the future perspective of the next 20-30 years the EU is doomed anyway. It will break by the reason of that itself is how it is. It had a good start, until after the Europe-wide left.-swing in the early nineties other ideologies and other ways of thinking took over from the desogning generation, and messed it up beyond repair. That's how I see it. That this will not be of benefit in the economical confrontations and conflicts over ressources, is self-explanatory. Maybe one thinks that in preparation of those battles one needs to push the EU through today, no matter the cost, but when the cost is that the knight is wqaering his shining armoud, but all the pieces are bound and fixed incompetently, then the first strike at his shield will cause the first plates of armour falling off, and soon he will stand there as prepared as he really is: naked. The EU cannot surviuve even when being exonomically strong, if he has not the support and loyalty of the european people behind it it, and protects their dufferences as well as their similiarities, and does not only try to melt cultuires all into one, but fosters their differences as well. The diversity, the many differences, the plenty of local specialities is what hoistorically formed europe'S strength that for quite some time made in the world'S leading power centre. Farmers know a multiculture always is more resistant and stronger and healthier than a monoculture basing, which in this case is being formed on bureaucratic pseudointellectual and pseudo-humanistic assumptions and blueprint theories.

The EU shines on the outside, and has a nice blue in its flag. But the inside I consider to be rotten. cheating deals in its decision makings and deals being formed, foul compromises, and a lacking understanding what one is, where one begins and where one ends, are all symptoms of this that people in the street perceive and relaize, despite the official desire to cover that by daily propaganda, and governments and parties trying to gain influence over the media so that they can better sell the officially desired versions of the stories. In Germany, this is a battle raging currently - and not many take even note. But what worth has a democracy if the sources of information you need to form your opinion and make your choice get corrupted by party interests and political tendencies? the chains are no longe rmade of iron, but are invisible and mean to manipulated people's mind from within, teaching them not to use their thinking potential to the fuzllest, and be satisfied with colourful blinking pictures instead, and slogans that go down the ear smooth and well. When seeing the collection of daily news in the two german non-privatised TV stations ARD and ZDF, the slogans and phrases that endlessly repeat themselves remind me of the old Aktuelle Kamera the GDR used to have.

[Tchocky]

Just back from voting. My primary school is the area's polling station, I've never felt so tall :p

Ticked Yes, naturally

[Skybird]

"Traitor...!"

[Tchocky]

Originally Posted by Skybird

"Traitor...!"

Honestly, Sky, you're not far off. According to some people on the No side here, that is :p

THere are posters in Dublin with the Proclamation of the Republic on them, the headline is "People died for your freedom, don't throw it away".
I'd prefer them to read "People died for your freedom, let's p*ss all over it with insulting posters like this"

[Skybird]

At least I can share your feeling of being tall in your school. Some weeks ago we had a city referendum wether or not the world's culture capitel of 2004 after 20 years of fighting finally should get a music hall (now think of that...).the referendum was held in a school were I spend 6th class. back then we already had lived for one a year in this city, before moving on to Berlin.

Of course, my much disliked city comrades voted No by 75% or so, and voted for a fairground place instead. They may have money in this city, but sure as hell they have no culture that goes beyond what is of gold, or sells you French Fries and a beer to loud pop music. So, no top class orchestras touring to Münster for another twenty years to come, this wannabe-culture-capitel of the world.

[asanovic7]

Sorry if I am being annoying but I have to say it, because I feel noone understood me.
What skybird is talking about is true, but I think he misses one final part of the puzzle. Whatever you vote, whatever you say, the world is allready set, cards are dealt and you can change ja...t.
Go out, vote, try to make world different. Like they care. It is fixable easy..
:rotfl: All you will find is the merry few laughing at you :rotfl:
Who are they? Who were they before?
Was like that before, will be forever.. More today, when you have lots of tvs, radios, screens telling you how it would be cool to have a bigger a.s of bigger .., along with what to drink, what to drive, what to eat and then you have yourself voting for.. Whom? What? Who cares? You vote based on a good poster, a good advert or your current mood affected by some tune on the radio and then when you do your civil "duty" you get back to your usual life again pumped with some new "important" things. Do you really think the world would be here if elections would be based on that?

And now to a more existent thought in my mind. Why is there a thing called eu, who needs it? Why, when supposedly no wars will happen, every leader likes the other one, and so on. Why there couldn't be free trade among the states no matter the eu or america or south america or asia. Why couldn't people live like they should? Because, in it there is no money. So..
This world is based on b...cks, and not only eu is gonna fall apart like you say skybird, everything will go to hell when corporations figure out they have too much supply of beans. Nice food for the soldiers. :rotfl:
The only thing eu is going to do is make a route to a big corporation governement of the world and the supreme power of the few, regardless of the peace/war issue.

Democracy is non existent fiction to make people happy. And
coca cola civilization is smashing everything like it is planned and whatever happens, it was planned 10 or 15 years ago.
The only thing we can do is work, play some game like sh3, f..k, have children, grow old, if we are lucky in peace, although war is always moneyworth and that's it. This computer civilization is the end of the man that used to be.

Sorry again if I am being annoying, this is my last word.. Anyways
Cheers!

p.s. and to that big computer that is counting how many times I said samao the wrong way around, although samao is also a terrorist fiction. I have one saying about the world and the few ruling.
"You just have to roll it, idiots will get caught by it like flies" :rotfl:

[Skybird]

Major German and British media have started to report that the Irish have said No.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7452171.stm

Not even half of voters showed up at the polling stations, which is seen as an explanation.

Assuming that the trend does not revers over the day, the Lisbon treaty by rules lined out by the EU itself is thereby rejected.

It now depends on wether EU-tricksters and cheaters again think their time has come to try to buy the Irish vote in the third run to force through what people do not want (and after that maybe a foruth and a fifth attempt if needed), or if the message finally is being heared in Brussel that the content of the EU constitution, renamed as the Lisbon treaty, is not of the content and quality that it will ever find much love in Europe. Special deals for several countries, not to mention the excentricity of Poland (that even was rewarded), certainly did not help to make the Lisbon comnstitution any more popular and representative for what the EU claims it should be, in an idealistical meaning - the creation of the treaty had anything to do but with idealism.

Threats by some politicians to kick out the Irish, or go without them, are unacceptable. One cannot set up rules, and if the outcome does not satisfy, kick out these rules one had set up oneself, or kick out the player following them but not producing the commanded result. One has cheated europe already three years ago. now trying betrayal of the europeans again?

Many Eurocrats see drama and heaven falling, but metaphorically speaking I see it as a chance to shut off the locked engine, restart in midair, and get the generator finally working before the plane crashes hard. Which would be the result if trying to switch on the generator with a failed engine one does not care to ignite. Granted, a critical time of transition, and if not more reason is to be seen in the future, possibly a time that could eventually mark the beginning of the end of the bloc as it was misplanned during the last ten years. I would cry for the EU as was planned during the 80s and very early nineties. for the EU of the past 10-15 years I would not shed a tear.

Nice one, Ireland!

[STEED]

Early forecasts show 60-65% voted no.

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/itn/2008061...y-41f21e0.html

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by STEED

Early forecasts show 60-65% voted no.

That will hopefully hold over the day!