Braindroppings: USE?

May 30, 2005

USE?

The French said No (or Non?). I am glad they did. Although people seem to have awfully short time memories lately, it was still refreshing to see that the French recognised the madness that would be "The United States of Europe" and acted to stop it.

Giscard d'Estaing, the former French president, was assigned to the task of heading the commission to create a "European Constitution" back in 2002. I remember his interview with the Guardian then, where he claimed that the whole thing is just an exercise, that he and others can never think of replacing the European individual governments.

Now, two three years later, they are actually taking this seriously. An EU Cabinet, EU minister of War (okay, Defence), this is crazy. Forget about the markets and multi-nationals and corporations, just the idea of having one person in charge of war is scary enough. This is an amazingly sensitive moment in history. This is when we, as human beings, are deciding whether a world-wide economic policy is going to determine our future. What if this whole thing is wrong? What if, by any chance, we dare and re-insert culture and individuality into economy? I know, economists shiver when they hear the word culture, but it exists.

I am not in favour of continuing 1000 years of bitterness between France, Germany, England, and Spain. I am very much in favour of peace and borderless Europe. But is it really a good idea to decide everyone's fate based on economic policies decided in Brussels by likes of Junker and Giscard d'Estaing? Is it the right decision just to say yes to a United Europe in order to put up some resistence against the United States of America (that's what it is, a reactionary vote on part of the "Yae" sayers, just to say no to the USA)?

I hope the Dutch, the Danes, and the Swedes stop this madness. No to USE!

More about this:

French 'Non' puts EU in turmoil

The heart says no to the body

Why Europe's not working

Posted by Khodadad at May 30, 2005 03:33 PM

Comments

I really don't know much about the proposed EU Constitution. I know that the American Constitution was not ratified by the required number of States until The Bill of Rights was added. Perhaps there chould be an analogous EU Bill of Rights that guarantees a certain level of soverenty to the individual member countries. Or perhaps France could be to the EU as Quebec is to Canada: a member, but with a certain querky independance. :)

Personally, I would like to see the rise of a powerful European superpower. I would like future Presidents of the U.S. to be far less capable of unilateral military adventurism!

Posted by: David at May 31, 2005 12:21 AM

The Dutch said 'no' too. I was quietly rooting for a strong 'No' all along even though I shouldn't be directly concerned about EU.

What is more important to me is sticking up to the phony and arrogant elitism that keeps blowing up ideals detached from realities and shoving them down the average people's throats while it openly looks down on them.

There are many European commentators who are thinking too loud now that putting the constitution to people's vote was wrong since people are dumb and incapable of making big decisions for themselves. Nonesense. Building something that turns out to have democratic deficit is something, but building it intentionally to be that way is somthing else.

The irony of the whole thing is that 10 years ago, the British were labelled by the same Ducth and French as reluctant Europeans who try to sabotage EU to avoid anyone stealing their thunder (as if there was any left from their thunder) or good riddance if they don't take part and things of that nature. Now it seems that while the English have warmed up to EU and and the Europeans have driven away from it, they are meeting in the middle.

Posted by: itchy_thoughts at June 2, 2005 08:18 AM

Posted by: prozac at July 11, 2005 06:52 AM