Enabling Collective Decision Making in Europe
by tdaxp ~ September 19th, 2008
Good news from the Eurocore… The Lisbon Treaty (Which would increase collective decision making in the European Union, thus making Europe less vulnerable to Russian divide-and-conquer tactics) will have another chance in Ireland, which rejected it in back in June. Also good news: a plurality of Irish who voted against the treaty did so out of ignorance, rather than opposition to collective decision making in Europe:
The Weekly Standard
Last week, the Irish foreign minister presented the details of an opinion poll analyzing the reasons behind the island’s “No” vote on the EU’s Lisbon Treaty on June 12. Three months ago, the latest EU attempt to streamline the 27-nation bloc’s institutional structures and decision-making procedures was rejected by a 53-43 percent margin. The poll was conducted in late July and involved more than 2000 Irish eligible voters. I have summarized some of the report’s key findings below..In the meantime, reports have surfaced indicating that the pro-EU government in Dublin will agree to hold a second referendum on the Lisbon Treaty in the Fall of 2009, most likely after having extracted concessions on keeping its only EU commissioner as well as sensitive issues such as abortion, taxation, and military neutrality.
The strengthening and expansion of the European Union is a vital part of the multilateral goal of shifting the balance of power in Eurasia as far as possible away from the central asian gap state of Russia, and to productive powers such as Europe, India, China, Korea, Japan, and so on.
The New York Times uses top 1% of income, not wealth. From the legend:...
September 19th, 2008 at 1:27 pm
Totally wrong. The European Union as constituted is a tyranny. It does not make the real, existing Europe, consisting of various real, existing countries, more powerful or productive. To the contrary. The EU could be replaced by NATO, which exists, and a free trade zone, and Europe — the reality, not the concept — would be better off.
The re-vote in Ireland is an atrocity. Making people vote over and over again until they give the answer the government wants proves that democracy a joke in Europe. It’s dead. Europe is becoming an undemocratic, elite-led, corporatist entity like China.
You worry too much about Russia. It is Nigeria with permafrost and nuclear weapons.
September 19th, 2008 at 1:34 pm
Lexington Green says,
“Europe is becoming an undemocratic, elite-led, corporatist entity like China.”
Leaving me to wonder what historical epoch LG is referring to as his foil. Hasn’t Europe always been this? I’m only half-joking, really.
September 19th, 2008 at 7:18 pm
I agree with Lexington. Passing the “Treaty” will do nothing to make Europe more secure against the Russkies. The Euros will continue to kowtow to them because they control much of the gas and oil that the EU depends on. The Euros will never have a real army that could defend Europe because they are mostly pacifists and appeasers. Most Euros have no stomach for hard choices or hard fighting. Look at the Euro contribution to NATO in Afghanistan. Most of the countries that have sent troops do not allow them to participate in combat operations. They are content, and will continue to be content with the Americans and Brits doing the heavy lifting.
September 19th, 2008 at 8:10 pm
agree with the above. the best thing america could do for EU military cohesiveness would be to withdraw from NATO. only then could we be (kind of) equal partners in the “core.”
September 20th, 2008 at 7:15 am
Lexington,
Certainly the European Union is not “A government in which a single ruler is vested with absolute power.,” which I think is the common understanding of tyranny.
Rather, the European Union is a coming-together of a bit more than a score of states, governed effectively two-tiers of sovereignty, ruled on the highest level by an executive cabinet known as the Council of the European Union, and a legislative body known as the European Parliament. These organs, especially with qualified majority voting [1], create a system of governance similar to that of the United States before the Civil War.
Now, the EU surely has a much more powerful bureaucracy than the antebellum US, but given the EU has also achieved more economic integration than the pre-War States, I’m not sure that’s a bad thing.
The re-vote in Ireland strikes me as a bit softer than the 9/13′s rule to pass the Constitution, when the Articles of Confederation clearly specified that any change required a unanimous decision.
Federalist X,
Europe, unlike the United States, has a class-based, feudal history that naturally impacts its present policy decisions. Europe, somewhat like China, has a system of meritocratic bureaucratic vetting designed to create a government of technocrats.
Mystery Meat + Doug,
The protection and expansion of Europe is not a military problem, and does not have a military solution. Military work can be hard work. But not all hard work is military work.
The EU was not meant to be, is not, and there is no reason it must become, a strong military power.
The hard work of European integration involves free trade with lower-wage states of eastern Europe, free immigration from those states into the rest of Europe, free movement of capital in those states from much richer western neighbors, and political integration of current and future members of the European Union.
To criticize the EU for not being militarily stronger is like criticizing the US for not adding more states recently. It is a valid criticism, but is also ignores the unique contribution that those unions are making.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qualified_Majority_Voting
September 21st, 2008 at 12:36 am
“Certainly the European Union is not “A government in which a single ruler is vested with absolute power.,” which I think is the common understanding of tyranny.” (Dan)
I’m pretty sure when people call the EU a “tyranny” they’re referring to the forced integration of European States, lack of freedom of speech, and persecution of anti-establishment political parties.
Its well known that people can be sent to prison for saying or writing the “wrong” things in Europe. In fact, some of topic discussed at this site, would be considered “incitement of racial hatred” in Europe (ie cognitive differences between ethnic groups).
Political parties have literally been deemed “illegal” in Europe (mostly right wing parties). After the Austrian Freedom Party won a majority in Austria, the EU imposed sanctions against Austria.[1] So while the EU might not fit the definition of a “tyranny,” its certainly not democratic.
The very fact that the Irish are being forced to vote again is also proof of the lack of liberty. Unfortunately, I predict the same kind of laws coming to America.
The EU is basically a more efficient version of the former Soviet Union.
[1] http://www.democracynow.org/2000/2/9/joerg_haider_and_austrias_freedom_party
September 22nd, 2008 at 12:38 pm
Seerov,
Thanks for your comment.
Most countries do not have foreign policies that are sustainable in a direct democracy. Certainly we do not. [1] Likewise, the House of Representatives prevents Congress from voting on Treaties at all. International relations are purposefully undemocratic, both in its modern form and its constitutional structure. So unless you are arguing that the US is also a tyranny, labeling the EU one on this basis seems on.
As to freedom of speech and freedom of association, you are stronger here, but such is not an argument against the EU. The choice is not between the EU and the US Constitution. The choice is between the EU and the even less liberal regimes that the European governments had before and without it.
The Soviet analogy is absurd, as the EU has a rule of law, is not a one-party dictatorship, has a relatively liberal economic regime, and so on.
[1] http://www.tdaxp.com/archive/2007/07/07/describing-the-military-industrial-sysadmin-complex-how-we-will-win-the-5gw-to-shrink-the-gap.html