butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Yes. That's why I asked you
ps you're a ballbag
Ok, what do the current rules state happens if one of the 27 members states doesn't ratify the treaty.
Ireland Votes No
- Thread starter phildwyer
- Start date
Ok, what do the current rules state happens if one of the 27 members states doesn't ratify the treaty.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
I didn't say that it was anything to do with 'reform' i simply suggested that offering a nebulous 'good' term in justification for the treaty,be it 'reform' or 'action', is pretty piss poor - whoevers offering it. I accept that the second of these two was the EU's alone though not yours.
CyberRose
أرفع الشفرات
That the Treaty cannot come into force
CyberRose
أرفع الشفرات
You mean positive 'buzz' words?
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
I mean the PR approach that partially relies on buzzwords and tactics like this rather than getting any real support yes
Someone commented elsewhere, they might as well run it again with 'good' and 'evil' or 'right' and 'wrong' as the poll options.
CyberRose
أرفع الشفرات
And those opposed to the Treaty don't do this?!
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Of course some of them do.
CyberRose
أرفع الشفرات
Well as you know from reading my many "ballbag" comments on the Treaty, you'll know I have commented a shit load on its content, rather than rely on just stating buzz words...
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
You're free to do that and use the sort of weka argument you used above about 'reform'. None of us are pefect
Well there appears to be something wrong with the thing, if everytime it gets put to the people they kick it back it seems that an entire re-think is required.
CyberRose
أرفع الشفرات
Well that's not entirely true, as there were some countries that had referendums for the original Constitution who voted in favour of it. It's also worth looking at the Czechs. They have a very anti-EU government who opposed the EU Constitution and denied their population a vote because public opinion was in favour of the Constitution!
CyberRose
أرفع الشفرات
Well, no reason to keep repeating myself to my adoring fans who know exactly what I think on the subject!You're free to do that and use the sort of weka argument you used above about 'reform'. None of us are pefect
But by contrast both France and Ireland voted against the treaty, two contries that have a citizenship who are generally considered pro-europe. There is something wrong with the thing.
You seem to be implying that the populace can't be trusted.
CyberRose
أرفع الشفرات
Why do you think France's population is generally pro-Europe? Because they're "European"?!
France and Ireland, I'm sure, have the same variety of views on Europe as most other countriesYou seem to be implying that I'm implying the populace cannot be trusted...
And if we really want to twist people's opinions round, perhaps I should suggest that you support the undemocratic rule of media barons...
Anyway, you keep saying that "there is something wrong" - what exactly do you think is wrong with the Treaty?
Why do you think France's population is generally pro-Europe? Because they're "European"?!
You seem to be implying that I'm implying the populace cannot be trusted...
And if we really want to twist people's opinions round, perhaps I should suggest that you support the undemocratic rule of media barons...
Anyway, you keep saying that "there is something wrong" - what exactly do you think is wrong with the Treaty?
What the fuck are you on about?
Point 1: Semantics aside (it's a friday after all) the populations of France and Ireland are more pro EU than England (I deliberatly use England here).
Point 2: WTF? I inferred from your posts that you felt the treaty should go through without it being put to referendum and I stated as much, I did not imply anything.
Point 3: Where to begin
Point 4: Personally I don't really care that much as I previously stated, my point all along is that if it keeps getting voted down there is a problem there. Removing the votes is not an acceptable solution and quite frankly stinks.
CyberRose
أرفع الشفرات
I don't agree with referendums but I have never said the Irish vote should be ignored. In fact, I've said exactly the opposite if you'd bothered to read my posts. I said Ireland needs to find out why the population rejected the Treaty then go back to the EU and the other member states and see if they can reach a compromise. For example, if they find out the Irish did not like x,y and z in the Treaty, they can see whether x,y and z can be taken out or amended. I have never said the exact same Treaty should be put back to the Irish...
I've read your posts which is how I rightly inferred your opposition to referendums.
Having said that you do make a interesting point regarding referendums in general. It does seem that in this case though the reason they are not being held is because the governments fear they will lose. That is no way to conduct democracy.
I also disagree with your solution to the current impase. Under your suggestion the Irish people would find themselves in an incredibly privlidged position, not only did they get a vote they now get to the option to pick and choose, a courtesy not extended to the other 99% of the European population.
For me the EU should do one of two things, either scrap the whole thing and rethink it or just implement it anyway and say screw you (which is essentually what has happened it most countries anyway).
CyberRose
أرفع الشفرات
Of course that is why they are not having a referendum. Ireland wouldn't be having a referendum were it nor for their national constitution. Referendums are called for a lot of the time by single issue groups who know that the probable results would be in their favour. Very rarely do you hear anyone calling for a referendum on an issue they don't know how the public will react to it. Also, referendums can be very dangerous because too many people only think about themselves rather than others (hence the whole existence of the Tory party and all who vote for it!) Can you imagine some of the issues now being put to public votes? Do you want to pay high taxes on fuel!? Do you think asylum seekers should be given shelter in the UK?!
The "EU" can't do anything. Each individual member state has to ratify new Treaties however they want. The only way the Treaty can be implemented in the "screw you" way is if Ireland changes it's constitution to remove the need for having a referendum to change the constitution, and guess what? They'll need to do that by a national referendum!
Also worth pointing out that in Germany, their constitution actually states there can be no national referendums for anything! So if you want everyone to have a vote they'd need to change their constitution
For me, doing nothing is not an option because I think the EU can be improved and needs to be improved. I don't think anyone here would disagree that democracy and efficiency needs improving, but in order to make changes that can only be done through an EU Treaty. So they're gonna have the basic reforms in as now because they all agree they are needed, but if it's gonna get stuck in Ireland every time then they need to make sure that the Irish will be happy with it. So not much point starting from scratch
yes, yes, quite. problem is, even 'representative groups' can be dullards sometimes. i mean just look at the House of Commons.
much, much better surely if we take a smaller sample, carefully selected to include only intelligent, slightly superior people who are fully capable of understanding complex issues such as these.
of course, economics is very complex as well, as are decisions of foreign affairs and defence. far too complex for the plebs to understand. besides, they're too busy with working for their living to really understand the true significance of current affairs.
do us all a favour and go back to the 18th century, puh-lease!This is clearly a subject you have a thorough and sound understanding of. I can see your soloution is very practical and will no doubt be the approach the EU will eventually take.
I am also not overly keen on referendums when they are used too frequently, I do however feel on key issues on national importance it is a appropriate thing to do. The fact that people vote selfishly is rather here nor there if that is the will of the people.
Whether this really is an issue of national importance is a matter of debate, for me it's probably not. I do however stand by my postion that something here stinks, and it's not painting the EU as a body or it's individual member state governments in a particuarly good light.
From Paulie's blog, post entitled 'The Enemy'
The expressed attitude (apropos the EU etc), whatever you make of it (personally, I violently disagree) is premised on the idea that (some) social institutions should be privileged over the individual(s). It looks like the bulk of posters on this thread would disagree with that; however isn't it a bulwark of leftist thinking to argue for collectivist solutions that require such social institutions?
gorski
customised free radical
That's complete bollocks, Darios!
From "Manifesto" onwards there are different views on it. In fact, in the "Manifesto" itself you have 2 different positions, also. One of them starts from the individual. Marx at that moment, writing it, was both a politician but also a critically minded thinker, whose position was based in his views of the revolution, which is his very grounding, as it were, when it comes to historical thinking and the "material" of his understanding of History...
These are not simple-minded, shitty little power plays, as you seem to be imagining them...
The left is certainly not uniform! In fact, there is not a single issue that unifies the left, that is obliging in any way, since the days of Stalin and co.
So, all this is loads of rubbish, innuendo, misunderstanding and usual non-thinking based in prejudices and power games...
Grow up, ffs...
From "Manifesto" onwards there are different views on it. In fact, in the "Manifesto" itself you have 2 different positions, also. One of them starts from the individual. Marx at that moment, writing it, was both a politician but also a critically minded thinker, whose position was based in his views of the revolution, which is his very grounding, as it were, when it comes to historical thinking and the "material" of his understanding of History...
These are not simple-minded, shitty little power plays, as you seem to be imagining them...
The left is certainly not uniform! In fact, there is not a single issue that unifies the left, that is obliging in any way, since the days of Stalin and co.
So, all this is loads of rubbish, innuendo, misunderstanding and usual non-thinking based in prejudices and power games...
Grow up, ffs...
That's complete bollocks, Darios!
From "Manifesto" onwards there are different views on it. In fact, in the "Manifesto" itself you have 2 different positions, also. One of them starts from the individual. Marx at that moment, writing it, was both a politician but also a critically minded thinker, whose position was based in his views of the revolution, which is his very grounding, as it were, when it comes to historical thinking and the "material" of his understanding of History...
These are not simple-minded, shitty little power plays, as you seem to be imagining them...
The left is certainly not uniform! In fact, there is not a single issue that unifies the left, that is obliging in any way, since the days of Stalin and co.
So, all this is loads of rubbish, innuendo, misunderstanding and usual non-thinking based in prejudices and power games...
Grow up, ffs...
What on earth are you talking about?
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Welcome to the world of professor gorski
gorski
customised free radical
My edit.
It's not every "leftist" thinking, organisation or programme that argues the same thing you mention, no! It's way too "journalisty", as it were...
Did you see the word "every" in my post?
You wrote some irrelevant apologist lines regarding Marx. Does this mean you're
supportive of collectivist institutions that are privileged over the individual in the same way as the blogger I quoted?
gorski
customised free radical
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/bulwark
No. It isn't straight forward, as you suggested. Quite the opposite. Many different takes. The Left is broad. It doesn't apply, in a very wide manner put forward by you, non!
No. It isn't straight forward, as you suggested. Quite the opposite. Many different takes. The Left is broad. It doesn't apply, in a very wide manner put forward by you, non!
The left isn't broadly supportive of collective institutions? Huh?
Oh and for those who missed it, Sarko's comments on the Irish vote:
[link]
Similar threads
