PDA

View Full Version : These Boots Are Gonna Walk All Over You



emiljoe
01-09-2008, 09:07 PM
These Boots Are Gonna Walk All Over You :fork:



http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/2773

An analysis by Prof. Anthony Coughlan

Today the European Union leaders signed the Lisbon Treaty. This treaty gives the EU the constitutional form of a state. These are the ten most important things the Lisbon Treaty does:

1. It establishes a legally new European Union in the constitutional form of a supranational European State.
2. It empowers this new European Union to act as a State vis-a-vis other States and its own citizens.
3. It makes us all citizens of this new European Union.
4. To hide the enormity of the change, the same name – European Union – will be kept while the Lisbon Treaty changes fundamentally the legal and constitutional nature of the Union.
5. It creates a Union Parliament for the Union's new citizens.
6. It creates a Cabinet Government of the new Union.
7. It creates a new Union political President.
8. It creates a civil rights code for the new Union's citizens.
9. It makes national Parliaments subordinate to the new Union.
10. It gives the new Union self-empowerment powers.

1. The Lisbon Treaty establishes a legally quite new European Union. This is a Union in the constitutional form of a supranational European State:

The Treaty gives this new Union a State Constitution which is identical in its legal effects to the EU Constitution that French and Dutch voters rejected in their 2005 referendums.

It does this by amending the two existing basic European Treaties, the "Treaty on European Union" (TEU) and the "Treaty Establishing the European Community" (TEC). The former retains its name, while the latter is renamed the "Treaty on the Functioning of the Union" (TFU). These two amended Treaties become the de facto Constitution of the new Union which they constitute or establish, although they are not called a Constitution. The EU has thus been given a Constitution indirectly rather than in direct form, as had been proposed in the Treaty which the peoples of France and Holland rejected in 2005.

The provision of the Lisbon Treaty that "The Union shall replace and succeed the European Community" (Art.1.3, amended TEU) makes absolutely clear that the post-Lisbon Union will be quite a new entity, as the European Community of which our countries are all currently members ceases to exist.

2. The Treaty empowers this new European Union to act as a State vis-a-vis other States and its own citizens:

To understand the change introduced by the Lisbon Treaty one needs to understand that what we call the European Union today is not a State. It is not even a legal or corporate entity in its own right, for it does not have legal personality. The name "European Union" at present is a descriptive term for all the relations between its 27 Member States.

At present these relations cover both the "European Community" area where supranational European law is operative, and the "intergovernmental" areas of foreign policy and justice and home affairs where Member States cooperate with one another on the basis of keeping their sovereignty and where European laws do not apply.

The Lisbon Treaty changes this situation by creating a constitutionally and legally quite new EU, while retaining the same name, the "Union". Unlike the present European Union, this legally new EU will be separate from and superior to its Member States, just as the USA is separate from and superior to California or New York, or Federal Germany to Bavaria or Brandenburg.

This new European Union can sign treaties with other States in all areas of its competence and conduct itself as a State in the international community of States. It can speak at the United Nations on agreed foreign policy positions of its Member States, just as in the days of the Soviet Union the USSR had a UN seat while Russia, Ukraine and Byelorussia had UN seats also.

The Lisbon Treaty also gives the EU a political President, a Foreign Minister – to be called a High Representative – a diplomatic corps and a Public Prosecutor. The new EU will accede to the European Convention on Human Rights, as all other European States have already done, including those outside the EU.

The Treaty also sets out the principle of the primacy of the laws of the new Union over the laws of its Member States (Declaration 27). The new EU makes the majority of laws for its Member States each year and under the Lisbon Treaty the new Union, which will replace the European Community, gets further power to make laws or take decisions by qualified majority vote in relation to some 68 new policy areas or matters where Member States currently have a veto.

3. The Treaty makes us all real citizens of this new European Union for the first time, instead of our being notional or honorary European "citizens" as at present:

A State must have citizens and one can only be a citizen of a State.

Citizenship of the European Union at present is stated to "complement" national citizenship, the latter being clearly primary, not least because the present EU is not a State. It is not even a corporate entity that can have individuals as members, not to mind citizens.

By transforming the legal character of the Union, the Lisbon Treaty transforms the meaning of Union citizenship. Article.17b.1 TEC/TFU replace the word "complement" in the sentence "Citizenship of the Union shall complement national citizenship", so that the new sentence reads: "Citizenship of the Union shall be in addition to national citizenship." This gives the 500 million inhabitants of the present EU Member States a real separate citizenship from citizenship of their national States for the first time. It gives a treble citizenship to citizens of Bavaria and Brandenburg within a Federal State like Germany. The rights and duties attaching to this citizenship of the new Union are be superior to those attaching to citizenship of one's own national State in any case of conflict between the two, because of the superiority of EU law over national law and constitutions.

As most States only recognise that one can have a single citizenship, henceforth it is one's Union citizenship which will be regarded by other countries as primary and superior to one's national citizenship.

Although we will be given rights as EU citizens, we should not forget that as real citizens of the new European Union we also owe it the normal citizens' duty of obedience to its laws and loyalty to its authority, which will be a higher authority than that of our national States and constitutions.

Member States retain their national constitutions, but they are subordinate to the new Union Constitution. As such they will no longer be constitutions of sovereign States, just as the various local states of the USA retain their constitutions although they are subordinate to the Federal US Constitution.

4. To hide the enormity of the change, the same name – European Union – will be kept while the Lisbon Treaty changes fundamentally the legal and constitutional nature of the Union. By this means the importance of the proposed change is kept hidden from the people:

The change in the constitutional nature of both the Union and its Member States will be made in three legal steps that are set out in the Treaty:

(a) It establishes a European Union with an entire legal personality and independent corporate existence in all Union areas for the first time, so that it can function as a State vis-a-vis other States and in relation to its own citizens (Art.32, amended TEU);

(b) This new European Union replaces the existing European Community and takes over all of its powers and institutions. It takes over as well the "intergovernmental" powers over foreign policy and crime, justice and home affairs which at present are outside the scope of European law, leaving only the Common Foreign and Security Policy outside the scope of its supranational power (Art.11.1, amended TEU).

It thereby gives a unified constitutional structure to the new Union which it will constitute or establish. The European Community disappears and all spheres of public policy will come within the scope of supranational EU law-making either actually or potentially, as in any constitutionally unified State. (One says "potentially" because further inter-State treaties would be required to transfer the minority of law-making powers still remaining with the Member States to the new Union in the future, or to shift powers back from the supranational level to the Member States – something that has never happened up to now. Supranational legislative acts would not yet be adopted in the sphere of Common Foreign and Security Policy and new treaties would be needed to change that. However the Commission, a key supranational body, will through the High Representative/Foreign Minister gain the right of initiative in the foreign policy field, so that even in the light of Art.11.1 TEU a de facto "supranationality" will be attained here);

(c) It makes us all real citizens of the new Federal Union which the Treaty establishes, with all the implications of that for downgrading our present personal status as citizens of sovereign nation States and superseding it by citizenship of a supranational European Federation.

5. It creates a Union Parliament for the Union's new citizens:

The Lisbon Treaty/EU Constitution makes Members of the European Parliament, who at present are "representatives of the peoples of the Member States", into "representatives of the Union's citizens" (Art.9a, amended TEU). This illustrates the constitutional shift the Treaty makes from the present European Union of national States and peoples to the new Federal Union of European citizens and their national states – the latter henceforth reduced constitutionally and politically to provincial or regional status.

6. It creates a Cabinet Government of the new Union:

The Treaty turns the European Council, the quarterly "summit" meetings of Member State Heads of State or Government, into an institution of the new Union, so that its acts and failures to act will, like all other Union institutions, be subject to legal review by the EU Court of Justice.

Legally speaking these summit meetings of the European Council will no longer be "intergovernmental" gatherings of Prime Ministers and Presidents outside supranational European structures. As part of the new EU´s institutional framework, they will instead be constitutionally required to "promote the Union's values, advance its objectives, serve its interests" and "ensure the consistency, effectiveness and continuity of its policies and actions." (Art. 9 amended TEU). They will also "define the general political direction and priorities thereof" (Art.9b).

The European Council thus becomes in effect the Cabinet Government of the new Federal EU, and its individual members will be primarily obliged to represent the Union to their Member States rather than their Member States to the Union.

7. It creates a new Union political President:

The federalist character of the European Council "summit" meetings in the proposed new Union structure is further underlined by the provision which gives the European Council a permanent political President for up to five years (two and a half years renewable once) (Art.9b).

There is no gathering of Heads of State or Government in any other international context which maintains the same chairman or president for several years while individual national prime ministers and prime ministers come and go.

The federal character of the new President is emphasised also by the Treaty provision which forbids that person from holding any national office and which lays down that he/she shall "ensure the external representation of the Union".

8. It creates a civil rights code for the new Union's citizens:

All States have codes setting out the rights of their citizens. The EU Charter of Fundamental Rights will be that. It will be made legally binding by the new Treaty and will be an essential part of the new Union's constitutional structure (Art.6, amended TEU).

The Charter is stated to be binding on the Union's own institutions and on Member States in implementing Union law. This limitation to EU law and to the EU institutions is unrealistic however, because

(a) the principles of primacy and uniformity of Union law mean that Member States will not only be bound by the Fundamental Rights Charter when implementing EU law, but also through the "interpretation and application of their national laws in conformity with Union laws" (v. ECJ judgements in the Factortame, Simmenthal and other law cases); and because

(b) the Charter sets out fundamental rights in areas in which the Union has currently no competence, e.g. outlawing the death penalty, asserting citizens' rights in criminal proceedings and various other areas.

This gives a new and extensive human and civil rights jurisdiction to the EU Court of Justice and makes that Court the final body to decide what people's rights are in the vast area covered by European law, as against national Supreme Courts and the Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg – the latter Court serving all other European States, not just the EU members – which are our final fundamental rights Courts today.

The EU Commission can be expected in time to propose European laws to ensure the uniform implementation and guarantee of the rights provisions of the Charter throughout the Member States, even in areas which are basically outside the scope of Union competence. American constitutional history provides ample evidence of the radical federalising potential of the fundamental rights jurisdiction of the US Supreme Court.

9. It makes national Parliaments subordinate to the new Union:

The Treaty underlines the subordinate role of National Parliaments in the constitutional structure of the new Union by stating that "National Parliaments shall contribute actively to the good functioning of the Union" by various means set out in Article 8c, amended TEU. The imperative "shall" implies an obligation on National Parliaments to further the interests of the new Union.

National Parliaments have in any case already lost most of their law-making powers to the EC/EU. The citizens who elect them have lost their powers to decide these laws too.

The provision of the Treaty that if one-third of the National Parliaments object to a Commission proposal, the Commission must reconsider it but not necessarily abandon it, is small compensation for the loss of democracy involved by the loss of 68 vetoes by National Parliaments as a result of other changes proposed by the Lisbon Treaty.

10. It gives the new Union self-empowerment powers:

These are shown by:

(a) the enlarged scope of the Flexibility Clause (Art.308 TEC/TFU), whereby if the Treaty does not provide the necessary powers to enable the new Union attain its very wide objectives, the Council may take appropriate measures by unanimity. The Lisbon Treaty extends this provision from the area of operation of the common market to all of the new Union's policies directed at attaining its much wider objectives. The Flexibility Clause has been widely used to extend EU law-making over the years;

(b) the proposed "Simplified Treaty Revision Procedure" which permits the Prime Ministers and Presidents on the European Council to shift Union decision-taking from unanimity to qualified majority voting in the "Treaty on the Functioning of the Union" (Art.33.6, amended TEU), where the population size of certain Member States is likely to be decisive; and

(c) the several "ratchet-clauses" or "passerelles" which would allow the European Council to switch from unanimity to majority voting in certain specified areas such as judicial cooperation in civil matters (Art.69d.3.2), in criminal matters (Art.69f.2), in relation to the EU Public Prosecutor (69i.4), and in a number of other areas.

Conclusion:

It is hard to think of any major function of a State which the new European Union will not have once the Lisbon Treaty is ratified. The main one seems to be the power to make its Member States go to war against their will. The Treaty does provide that the EU may go to war while individual Member States may "constructively abstain".

The obligation on the Union to "provide itself with the means necessary to attain its objectives and carry through its policies" (Art. TEC/TFU 269 a), which means raising its "own resources" to finance them, may be regarded as conferring on it wide taxation and revenue-raising powers, although these will require unanimity to exercise. Currently public expenditure and the tax measures needed to finance it remain overwhelmingly at national state level. This is because such social services as health, education, social security and public housing, as well as defence, policing and public transport – the government functions which cost most money – are still mainly at this level.

However the new European Union will have its own government, with a legislative, executive and judicial arm, its own political President, its own citizens and citizenship, its own human and civil rights code, its own currency, economic policy and revenue, its own international treaty-making powers, foreign policy, foreign minister, diplomatic corps and United Nations voice, its own crime and justice code and Public Prosecutor. It already possesses such normal State symbols as its own flag, anthem, motto and annual official holiday.

As regards the State authority of the new Union, it is embodied in the Union' s own executive, legislative and judicial institutions: the European Council, Council of Ministers, Commission, Parliament and Court of Justice. It is also embodied in the Member States and their authorities as they implement and apply EU law and interpret and apply national law in conformity with Union law. Member States will be constitutionally required to do this under the Lisbon Treaty. Thus EU "State authorities" as represented for example by soldiers and policemen in EU uniforms on our streets are not needed as such.

Allowing for the special features of each case, all the classical Federal States which have been formed on the basis of power being surrendered by lower constituent states to a higher Federal authority have developed in a gradual way, just as has happened in the case of the European Union. Nineteenth century Germany, the USA, Canada and Australia are classical examples. Indeed the EU has accumulated its powers much more rapidly than some of these Federal States – in the short historical time-span of some sixty years.

The key difference between these classical Federations and the new European Union is that the former, once their people had settled, share a common language, history, culture and national solidarity that gave them a democratic basis and made their State authority popularly legitimate and acceptable. All stable States are founded on such communities where people speak a common language and mutually identify with one another as one people – a "We". In the EU however there is no European people or "demos", except statistically. The Lisbon Treaty is an attempt to construct a highly centralised European Federation artificially, from the top down, out of Europe's many nations, peoples and States, without their free consent and knowledge.

If there were to be a European Federation that is democratic and acceptable, the minimum constitutional requirement for it would be that its laws would be initiated and approved by the directly elected representatives of the people either in the European Parliament or the National Parliaments. Unfortunately, neither the Lisbon Treaty nor the EU Constitution it establishes contain any such proposal.

By giving a Constitution indirectly rather than directly to the new European Union which it will establish, the Lisbon Treaty sets in place what Belgian Prime Minister Guy Verhofstadt has called the "capstone of a European Federal State". For the Euro-federalist political elites who have been driving this process over decades this is the culmination of what started nearly 60 years ago when the 1950 Schuman Declaration, which is commemorated annually on 9 May, Europe Day, proclaimed the European Coal and Steel Community to be the "first step in the federation of Europe".

The peoples of Europe do not want this kind of highly centralized Federal European Union whose most striking feature is that it is run virtually entirely by committees of politicians, bureaucrats and judges, none of whom are directly elected by the people. The Constitutional Treaty setting it up has already been rejected by the French and the Dutch in 2005. As French President Nicolas Sarkozy has admitted, the Prime Ministers and Presidents have agreed among themselves on no account to have referendums on the Renamed Constitutional Treaty, for that would be rejected everywhere again.

Only the Irish are enabled to have their say on it because of the constitutional case taken before the Supreme Court by the late Raymond Crotty. That action by that great Irishman stopped the State's politicians of that time from ratifying a previous European Treaty, the Single European Act, in an unconstitutional manner.

LRPV
01-09-2008, 09:16 PM
"The Treaty gives this new Union a State Constitution which is identical in its legal effects to the EU Constitution that French and Dutch voters rejected in their 2005 referendums."

So Europeans are now more disenfranchised than in feudal times? Surely this is exagerated?

Sniffit
01-09-2008, 10:52 PM
"The Treaty gives this new Union a State Constitution which is identical in its legal effects to the EU Constitution that French and Dutch voters rejected in their 2005 referendums."

So Europeans are now more disenfranchised than in feudal times? Surely this is exagerated?

Yes, it is exagerated. This is a political article, not a scientific paper.

angry cow
01-10-2008, 12:39 AM
I'm all for a strong and centralized EU, so long as it is responsive to its citizens. I understand that it is a scary time for the EU, those of us Americans who have studied our own history are aware of how controversial the shift from a loose confederation of colonies to United States was, in many ways it was a transition that wasn't completed until the end of the Civil War, nearly one hundred years (and over 600,000 dead) later.

It is a difficult choice that Europeans must face, whether to have a system that is more responsive, more egalitarian, but weaker in foreign policy. Or to have a larger more powerful federation that has a much larger bureaucracy separating the people from their government?

In addition, a stronger EU can be more active in world affairs, something that the world needs right now.

BW2
01-10-2008, 01:41 AM
Interesting, the EU seems bent on establishing a federation to mimic the United States of America. Well one itty bitty problem with that, see unlike the USA, Europe is no where near in sharing a common language much less history. What happens when one EU member (the big boys) starts getting fed up with translating a single piece of document into 20+ different languages?

I would ask any members here who reside in the EU (along with their home nation) who do you feel more obligated to identify yourself with or to simplify where does your loyalty lie? to the EU or your country?

This isn't a case of a new world (America) where everyone was in some way or another new and lost to this strange new land. Everyone was on equal footing. Is this the case with Europe? well if you think so, then please punch yourself in the face.


a stronger EU can be more active in world affairs, something that the world needs right now. The EU is about as effective in its own affairs as a beached whale...

JJC
01-10-2008, 01:49 AM
And they always made fun of those "stupid Americans" who for all this time knew that Europe was a country.

PsychoMantis
01-10-2008, 07:37 AM
Interesting, the EU seems bent on establishing a federation to mimic the United States of America. Well one itty bitty problem with that, see unlike the USA, Europe is no where near in sharing a common language much less history. What happens when one EU member (the big boys) starts getting fed up with translating a single piece of document into 20+ different languages?

I would ask any members here who reside in the EU (along with their home nation) who do you feel more obligated to identify yourself with or to simplify where does your loyalty lie? to the EU or your country?

This isn't a case of a new world (America) where everyone was in some way or another new and lost to this strange new land. Everyone was on equal footing. Is this the case with Europe? well if you think so, then please punch yourself in the face.

The EU is about as effective in its own affairs as a beached whale...
Im intrested in hearing how Citizens feel about having their countries fuse with other countries or how or if people still have Nationalism sentiments.

TheBelgian
01-10-2008, 08:05 AM
Interesting, the EU seems bent on establishing a federation to mimic the United States of America. Well one itty bitty problem with that, see unlike the USA, Europe is no where near in sharing a common language much less history. What happens when one EU member (the big boys) starts getting fed up with translating a single piece of document into 20+ different languages?

I would ask any members here who reside in the EU (along with their home nation) who do you feel more obligated to identify yourself with or to simplify where does your loyalty lie? to the EU or your country?

This isn't a case of a new world (America) where everyone was in some way or another new and lost to this strange new land. Everyone was on equal footing. Is this the case with Europe? well if you think so, then please punch yourself in the face.

The EU is about as effective in its own affairs as a beached whale...

First off, just because we're moving towards a more centralized Union, doesnt mean we're trying to 'mimic' the united states. the US doesnt hold the patent on uniting sub units into a larger government. We're just acknowledging the fact that in order to stay competitive on the world stage, we cant remain 20-odd small fragmented countries, we have to bundle our resources and unite, economically or maybe even politically.

As for the language issue, big deal, it really doesnt affect us Europeans that much. We're used to having to switch languages when we cross a border. Anyone who climbs to a position high enough to actually have to supervise several nations in any respect, or hold a high position in the EU hierarchy will undoubtedly speak Engligh, French or German, or more likely, all three. The communiciation and language is a problem that is over exaggerated.

As for the nationality issue, I gotta say, I think there are quite a lot of people who identify more with Europe than their own countries. This doesnt mean we have a lack of patriotism (though many of us do), but a pride in being from such an economically healhty, multicultural, polyglot, historically important continent. And the EU is the political represetation of that continent.

I'm not sure I get your point about the new world. I'm guessing your're saying that i should "punch myself in the face" if I feel Europeans are equal. You can punch yourself in the face, cause I feel Europeans are as equal in rights and privilleges as any other society out there.

As for your last point, please demonstrate why the EU is as effective in its own affairs as a beached whale. I think we're doing a damn good job. This is a process of centralisation never before seen in history. Sure there's a lot of issues to adress, first among them the burgeoning bureaucracy of the EU. But through the EU, europe is once again a major player in world affairs, an economic superpower, and probably the most developed continent in the world.

Billy No Mates
01-10-2008, 08:47 AM
Im intrested in hearing how Citizens feel about having their countries fuse with other countries or how or if people still have Nationalism sentiments.

I dont have nationalistic sentiments but i am a quietly patriotic Brit,im all for trade and co-operation with other countrys but dont feel that that has to be both in and with people in some exclusive euro club .
Im most suspicous of the relentless political impetus towards some kind of U.S.E because it seems to be coming from the top down a female government minister was on TV at the time crediting 'Europe' with everything from peace in our time to being able to go on holiday.....

AROUETLJ
01-10-2008, 10:26 AM
Interesting, the EU seems bent on establishing a federation to mimic the United States of America. .

To you, across the pond, it SEEMS that way, but the reality is much different.

Vandervahn
01-10-2008, 10:50 AM
Interesting, the EU seems bent on establishing a federation to mimic the United States of America.

If it helps your understanding to put it that way, so be it. Fact is that the new treaty does not shape the EU into a superstate, even though the author likes to throw around that word. Without a question the new (as well as many old) institutions formed by this treaty share certain commonalities with "proper" nation states. That doesnt mean they are automatically the same.

The problem with the EU is that it is actually only a synonym for a myriad of different institutions, treaties and agreements that more or less were agreed upon independently from each other (the so-called three pillars of the EU). What the treaty tries is to do is shed some weight by establishing an EU responsible for its workings from the head downward, as opposed to its current situation as being a pool of independent organizations. Imagine a country whose institutions all act independently and with their own sets of rules, their own decision making process, their own elections, without a streamlined interdependency. Is it not feasible to put a proper governing body on top, to... get things organized? Thats what is happening, not more, not less.

Is an Europe state possible? Certainly, but not in the foreseeable future.


Well one itty bitty problem with that, see unlike the USA, Europe is no where near in sharing a common language much less history.

Umm... Europe shares a few thousand years of migration, alliances, animosities, mutual influences, culture, royalty and so forth. What deepfounded history exactly do the native americans, Latinos, Afro-Americans, Asians and European settlers share? And language has never been too big of a problem... how often will a Spanish fisherman have to communicate with a store clerk from Finland? The language differences have been part of this continents rich cultural background as well.


What happens when one EU member (the big boys) starts getting fed up with translating a single piece of document into 20+ different languages?

Then a solution will be found. The EU represents 60 years of solutions that were found. Learn, adapt, progress.



I would ask any members here who reside in the EU [...] where does your loyalty lie? to the EU or your country?

To my country and to me being Euopean. My loyalty also goes to my state, my city, even to the quarter an street where I am from. Additionally to my favorite Sports Club and my favorite bar. Really, I hear this question constantly in these discussions, but is it that hard to accept that loyalty is not reserved for one construct alone? (Since Nation states are purely arbitrary formations as well).

Ask a man from Dallas at home what he is and he will say he´s a Dallas man. Ask him the same somewhere else in the country and he will say he´s he´s a Texan. Ask him in a foreign country and he will say he´s an American. And every statement does not negate the previous.

Mastermind
01-10-2008, 11:33 AM
Interesting, the EU seems bent on establishing a federation to mimic the United States of America. Well one itty bitty problem with that, see unlike the USA, Europe is no where near in sharing a common language much less history. What happens when one EU member (the big boys) starts getting fed up with translating a single piece of document into 20+ different languages?

I would ask any members here who reside in the EU (along with their home nation) who do you feel more obligated to identify yourself with or to simplify where does your loyalty lie? to the EU or your country?

This isn't a case of a new world (America) where everyone was in some way or another new and lost to this strange new land. Everyone was on equal footing. Is this the case with Europe? well if you think so, then please punch yourself in the face.

The EU is about as effective in its own affairs as a beached whale...

I find the opposite is happening here. Political powers try constantly to sub-divide the people to make them forget they are Americans first....sub-titles, race and hyphens now rule....Each group, thus sub divided into small and dedicated loyalties are much easier to conquer than one group who thinks of themselves as Americans first...notice how "Nationalism" is now derided and is called faschism....think about it. So it is the EU leaders can conquer the sub groups of "Europeans".

Kitsune
01-10-2008, 01:25 PM
The article makes sweeping claims which are at times simply wrong. Like:

Member States retain their national constitutions, but they are subordinate to the new Union Constitution. As such they will no longer be constitutions of sovereign States, just as the various local states of the USA retain their constitutions although they are subordinate to the Federal US Constitution.
That is utter rubbish. Actually it is so that all those member states have voluntarily chosen to adhere to the rules of the club they joined - and that is the only reason why anyone has to follow the laws of the EU. This is a simple necessity in many fields, like for example the whole common market idea. In contrast to America however, each and any member nation of the EU has the power to simply leave the Union - before or after Lisbon. Wether it is Britain, Finland, Greece, Poland or Spain - anyone can just step out. In contrast to this, California or Texas can't just leave the USA. Well, Texas and some others attempted this once but were beaten in the war that followed. Since then nobody dared to even try. One can by no means say that the EU would now be like the US.
Nor is it like the late USSR. As much as one might to criticize the Union in some areas, you don't get rolled over by an "Blue Army" tank when you're demanding free elections. Not yet at least.

theholeinthedonut
01-10-2008, 05:04 PM
The article makes sweeping claims which are at times simply wrong. Like:

That is utter rubbish. Actually it is so that all those member states have voluntarily chosen to adhere to the rules of the club they joined - and that is the only reasons why anyone has to follow the laws of the EU's laws. This is a simple necessity in many fields, like for example the whole common market idea. In contrast to America however, each and any member nation of the EU has the power to simply leave the EU - before or after Lisbon. Wether it is Britain, Finland, Greece, Poland or Spain - anyone can just step out. In contrast California or Texas can't. Well, Texas and some others tried once but were beaten in the war that followed. Since then nobody dared to even try. One can by no means say that the EU would now be like the US.
Nor is it like the late USSR. As much as one might to criticize the Union in some areas, you don't get rolled over by an "Blue Army" tank when you're demanding free elections. Not yet at least.

Nothing to add there! Good post!
BTW: Hullo Kitsune.

KoTeMoRe
01-10-2008, 05:10 PM
Nothing to add there! Good post!
BTW: Hullo Kitsune.


Kitsune, it's only a matter of time...Like when Kosovo and Serbia will be on the same boat.p-)

Mastermind
01-10-2008, 05:18 PM
The article makes sweeping claims which are at times simply wrong. Like:

That is utter rubbish. Actually it is so that all those member states have voluntarily chosen to adhere to the rules of the club they joined - and that is the only reasons why anyone has to follow the laws of the EU's laws. This is a simple necessity in many fields, like for example the whole common market idea. In contrast to America however, each and any member nation of the EU has the power to simply leave the EU - before or after Lisbon. Wether it is Britain, Finland, Greece, Poland or Spain - anyone can just step out. In contrast California or Texas can't. Well, Texas and some others tried once but were beaten in the war that followed. Since then nobody dared to even try. One can by no means say that the EU would now be like the US.
Nor is it like the late USSR. As much as one might to criticize the Union in some areas, you don't get rolled over by an "Blue Army" tank when you're demanding free elections. Not yet at least.
"Not Yet At least"...and only time will tell.

Kitsune
01-10-2008, 05:52 PM
@theholeinthedonut: p-)




@Mastermind:

"Not Yet At least"...and only time will tell. It will, like always. But I doubt that too much militarism will ever be the EU's undoing. Too much pacifism might be, however. ;-)

Mastermind
01-10-2008, 06:30 PM
So, like the USA, they go out with a whimper rather than a bang?

Your thoughts?

Kitsune
01-10-2008, 06:51 PM
@MM:

The memberstates of the EU lack at present a certain will to stand together - even for the purpose of only defending themselves. This way, the Union can be easily divided and thus marginalized by an outside power, like the US or Russia. That would have to change sooner or later. But then, for the Europeans, to be one of the really Great Powers of the world is a step upward on the ladder and something they have to get used to (again, in the case of some memberstates).
As for the US, I don't see them "going out with a whimper". Within the foreseeable future, the Americans will have to get used to the idea that they are also becoming "just" one of the World's Great Powers among others and cease to be the one and single Hyperpower that hovers above the rest. But that won't be the end of America. Since this development means for the US taking a step downward on the ladder, they may even have more problems with it than the Europeans have with their step upward. We'll see.

BW2
01-10-2008, 07:45 PM
Gee I hadn't realized we had such Europhile's here... :roll:

Why is the EU a beached whale, you ask? Well because they are still stuck trying to fix and agree on their own internal problems while dreaming of some "super power" role in the wider world. Its a bulky organization who's bureaucratic system has earned itself its very own name = Eurocratic.

Rictor
01-11-2008, 12:57 AM
It is a difficult choice that Europeans must face, whether to have a system that is more responsive, more egalitarian, but weaker in foreign policy. Or to have a larger more powerful federation that has a much larger bureaucracy separating the people from their government?

In other words: republic or empire. And personally I don't have to think twice about which I prefer. Pity that most Europeans (see, even categorizing them as such implies a single people) either can't see it or don't agree.

Europe does not "need" a stronger foreign policy. No one does. It's a chest-thumping measure, not something that actually improves the lives of ordinary people. It's the mindset of a bully, to be able to lord it over others. What we need is not more superpowers but no superpowers.

Kitsune
01-11-2008, 01:43 PM
Sry, Rictor. But your attitude is quite naive. Besides, I doubt that either the US, Russia, China or even India are sharing it. No one said something about bullying people, but as it is, there are basically two roles you can play in this world: player or ball. And I prefer the player role, so sorry.
Do not forget one thing: power itself is neither moral nor immoral. Only what you do with it is. And you can only use your own power to prevent that somebody else has power over you. I fail to see why that should be despicable.

Mastermind
01-11-2008, 02:15 PM
To "step down" the ladder is decline...and history seldom allows a nation to "reclimb the ladder" once decline has begun. "Decline" always begins the book, "Decline and Fall of Xxx" and should never be tolerated by any nation.

I have lived to witness an amazing transformation within my nation. It is not what it once was...for better or worse. We have been desegregated to a point we no longer understand we really are a nation. Our heritage has now been dissolved, our Christian values have been eroded, our rights as American citizens have been delivered to the "World" at large and our Pride of Nation is only a memory. We now fill our military ranks with foreign nations, encouraging their enlistment with promises of "Citizenship" they will soon find would have been theirs merely for stepping across our wide open borders. Our leaders are hog tied by ever increasing political correctness and nuace.

TheBelgian
01-11-2008, 06:42 PM
Gee I hadn't realized we had such Europhile's here... :roll:

Why is the EU a beached whale, you ask? Well because they are still stuck trying to fix and agree on their own internal problems while dreaming of some "super power" role in the wider world. Its a bulky organization who's bureaucratic system has earned itself its very own name = Eurocratic.

Gee I hadn't realized we had such Eurosceptics here :roll:

True, there is a huge bureaucracy that needs to be greatly reduced. But do you think its an easy task to unify 25 differing nations. It's a miracle we've gotten this far without the whole thing falling appart. This new treaty is a step in the right direction, making the Union stronger, more coherent, and more efficient. Sure there are still problems, and some people may feel that nations are losing their sovreignty. But if it wasnt for the EU, our region wouldnt mean squat on the international stage, and I'm pretty sure we wouldnt be as well of as we are today, the most advanced region in the world with one of the world's strongest currencies.
Plus, only some people are openly dreaming of a European superpower, and almost no one in government is doing that. But whats wrong with aiming high, eh? In economic terms we're already a superpower. No one is seriously saying we should copy the US, and back up our economic power with a ton of carrier battle groups and nuclear weapons.
Whatever problems you may have with the EU, you can bet your ass its benefits far outweigh its drawbacks. And though we may never end up being a military superpower, the EU has made us en economic powerhouse. And in this world, unfortunatly, economics is the holy grail.

Plus you still havent given any concrete examples to back up your "beached whale" claim. All I see here is textbook Eurosceptic ranting.

angry cow
01-12-2008, 07:07 AM
Uniting the diverse cultures and peoples of the European Union is a far more difficult task than uniting the primarily protestant and english 13 colonies. And yet the EU is more of a unified country than the United States was until the ratification of the constitution of the United States in 1787.

There is an undeniable trend in world affairs that people are becoming more and more interdependent and interconnected, you can't built a wall high enough around your country to keep out satellite, radio, television, or the internet. Nobody has spent more time and effort than China, and they still failed. And its naive to think that an event like Benazir Bhutto getting assassinated on the other side of the planet doesn't have an effect. And that if we just focus on internal problems the outside problems will go away. Being a player on the world stage means that you can influence other nations in a way that is beneficial to BOTH. If not, all you can do is sit there and whine about all the bad things the big bad countries do. If you are big and bad yourself, you can actually stand up and do something about it.

perdurabo
01-12-2008, 08:49 AM
I would ask any members here who reside in the EU (along with their home nation) who do you feel more obligated to identify yourself with or to simplify where does your loyalty lie? to the EU or your country?

witch one dose your loyalty lie your hometown or your country? p-) for me it is like: my family and friends > my hometown (more like my mountines - Sudety, i dislike city itselfe but all that is around of it i simply love) > Poland > EU
so it is just another level added.

KoTeMoRe
01-12-2008, 01:49 PM
witch one dose your loyalty lie your hometown or your country? p-) for me it is like: my family and friends > my hometown (more like my mountines - Sudety, i dislike city itselfe but all that is around of it i simply love) > Poland > EU
so it is just another level added.


All that with an israeli flag in avatar...p-), Jk/Jk.