For Blair, Power trumps Money

[Heraclitus]

Originally posted by Cort Haus


Yeah, Brotherhood and Unity!



Oh wait....

The lesson is clear either don’t accept Croatia or don’t accept Serbia into the union and you should do fine.

[Cort Haus]

Originally posted by Heraclitus
The lesson is clear either don’t accept Croatia or don’t accept Serbia into the union and you should do fine.

I think there's a reasonable chance that Croatia and Serbia will get along OK at some point in the next 50-100 years. After all, England and Scotland have just about managed to maintain a peaceful union for a few hundred years despite a rather acrimonious history, and even England and France eventually developed an 'entente cordiale'.

[Heraclitus]

Originally posted by Cort Haus


I think there's a reasonable chance that Croatia and Serbia will get along OK at some point in the next 50-100 years. After all, England and Scotland have just about managed to maintain a peaceful union for a few hundred years despite a rather acrimonious history, and even England and France eventually developed an 'entente cordiale'.

Are you sure the English-Scottish union is a good example?

[C0ckney]

Originally posted by Heraclitus
Valid points, but the politics on the level of the Union is created by nationally elected officials. If you won’t change vote for different national parties that propose the changes you want. Off course the problem is that a political change in one country isn’t enough. Now true France, Germany and the UK have a decisive influence in the Union, but they “need” their political clout to ensure economic policies that suit them (which they do very well mind you).

in this country the pro and anti european camps cross party lines, although generally you can say the liberals are the most pro, followed by labour and then the tories (who are pretty sceptical). interestingly, there are 4 labour MPs currently facing expulsion from the party for having the cheek to publicly support the campaign for a referendum.

as you rightly say though, political changes in one country are not enough. the problem as i see it, is with politicians across europe and their reluctance to engage with people in a proper debate about the EU and its future.

Maybe you should then vote for parties that want to empower the EU parliament, and then vote the guys you want in those elections.

i don't have much faith in the european parliament, whose members remind me of pigs at the trough, moreso even than national politicians. it's an institution i would like to see given more power, but only after some significant reform has taken place.

In the mean time EU citizens should make as much nosie as possible with petittions, via teh courts and even lobby organizations.

i agree with this.

bebro, just to be clear, when i said "if you want..." i didn't mean you personally.

[C0ckney]

Actually it was, since I wasn’t commenting on the state of Slovenian democracy, I was commenting on the state of western democracy.

you were talking about how fragile western democracy is. i was merely pointing out that in many places it is anything but fragile and in fact ingrained very deeply into the fabric of our societies.

[Colon™]

Originally posted by Cort Haus
Interestingly, though perhaps not surprisingly, nowhere does the article feature the words "elected" or "democracy".

EU = 4th Reich

Oh, rest assured, plenty of europhiles would love to see a president elected by popular vote, as well as a parliament that has the power of legislative iniative and a government that requires parliamentary approval. The trouble is, this is every europhobe's nightmare, since it implies a supranational level with popular legitimacy. It implies national governments no longer control the EU. It implies the European superstate that keeps them from sleeping at night.

You know, back in the days I used to have a lot of EU discussions with Iaiaiaiaiaian (who has long left the forum) and he would at least be straightforward about his motivation, namely preserving the sovereignty of the European nations (particularly the UK's). Since then, europhobes have switched tune and constantly tout democracy as their main argument against the EU, while they hate the idea of popular legitimacy. They are particularly opposed to the ideas of integrated foreign and defence policies, while these are actually the most popular subjects amongst the European public.

Don't get me wrong, I share some of your concerns regarding democratic legitimacy and I believe EU institutions are sticking their nose in way too many matters that should be preserve of national governments (for god's sake, abolish the CAP and let the member states handle it on their own), but I have a hard time keeping my face straight when a Brit complains about the EU's democratic credentials.
Maybe I'm wrong in my prejudices and you actually would like to have quadrennial presidential elections and a common foreign policy, but I doubt so.

[LordShiva]

Colon sighting!

[BeBMan]

Originally posted by C0ckney
bebro, just to be clear, when i said "if you want..." i didn't mean you personally.

No prob

[Saras]

Originally posted by Colon™


Oh, rest assured, plenty of europhiles would love to see a president elected by popular vote, as well as a parliament that has the power of legislative iniative and a government that requires parliamentary approval. The trouble is, this is every europhobe's nightmare, since it implies a supranational level with popular legitimacy. It implies national governments no longer control the EU. It implies the European superstate that keeps them from sleeping at night.

You know, back in the days I used to have a lot of EU discussions with Iaiaiaiaiaian (who has long left the forum) and he would at least be straightforward about his motivation, namely preserving the sovereignty of the European nations (particularly the UK's). Since then, europhobes have switched tune and constantly tout democracy as their main argument against the EU, while they hate the idea of popular legitimacy. They are particularly opposed to the ideas of integrated foreign and defence policies, while these are actually the most popular subjects amongst the European public.

Don't get me wrong, I share some of your concerns regarding democratic legitimacy and I believe EU institutions are sticking their nose in way too many matters that should be preserve of national governments (for god's sake, abolish the CAP and let the member states handle it on their own), but I have a hard time keeping my face straight when a Brit complains about the EU's democratic credentials.
Maybe I'm wrong in my prejudices and you actually would like to have quadrennial presidential elections and a common foreign policy, but I doubt so.

Go to cutefest you chocolate duck

[Agathon]

Originally posted by C0ckney

you were talking about how fragile western democracy is. i was merely pointing out that in many places it is anything but fragile and in fact ingrained very deeply into the fabric of our societies.

People who claim that Britain is a democratic country clearly have very little understanding of what "democracy" means.

Clue: it doesn't mean voters essentially rubber stamping one of two far right parties every five years.

You can't even begin to claim you're a democracy in the contemporary world without PR.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by C0ckney

you were talking about how fragile western democracy is. i was merely pointing out that in many places it is anything but fragile and in fact ingrained very deeply into the fabric of our societies.

People who claim that Britain is a democratic country clearly have very little understanding of what "democracy" means.

Clue: it doesn't mean voters essentially rubber stamping one of two far right parties every five years.

You can't even begin to claim you're a democracy in the contemporary world without PR.

[C0ckney]

so by your reckoning new zealand is a democracy, whilst canada is not?

britain is a western democratic state by all the measures that reasonable people use to determine such things. while technically a constitutional monarchy, britain would be described as a democracy by anyone using the commonly understood meaning of the word.

thanks for coming aggie, but i'm afraid i'm not buying what you are selling.

[Cort Haus]

Originally posted by Heraclitus
Are you sure the English-Scottish union is a good example?

It might not last in to the future as a union, but it has been peaceful, and the countries have worked well together. They even built an empire together, which while being morally questionable, was certainly an achievement. More to the point, together they made a huge contribution to the innovative industrial and technological development of the planet.

[Heraclitus]

Originally posted by Cort Haus

They even built an empire together, which while being morally questionable, was certainly an achievement. More to the point, together they made a huge contribution to the innovative industrial and technological development of the planet.

So did the Soviet Union

[Krill]

The British Empire lasted slightly longer though...