Way to Russia Talk Lounge

cyndy22 · Posted: Sun May 29, 2005 9:41 pm Post subject: For France!! Vive le France!

I wish to say that I hope voting today in France results in positive unification for EU and France. Please keep me posted on results. Vortecks and Mr. Wizz, please tell me your thoughts of this election. Smile

BTW the French KNOW how to live... Smile

El Casey · Posted: Sun May 29, 2005 10:09 pm Post subject:

I must admit I am torn on the EU Constitution issue. On the one hand, European states can no longer compete as individual nation-states; an economic union and competition as a continent are absolutely imperative if they want to "stay in the game," as it were, especially with rising pressures from Asia and India. On the other hand, if this economic union is going to "Americanize" the European workforce (please note that I don't necessarily use this as a derogatory term, but rather a term describing large-scale privatization, 40+ hour work weeks, weakening of labor unions, loss of benefits, etc) then I am adamantly opposed to it.

What completely muddles the issue is that I am of the opinion that without the Constitution, the EU will fail, and I fear for the economic future of Europe if the EU fails, especially as one who aspires to attain European citizenship at some point. Even if 25 nations pass the treaty, without France the EU is nothing; France is a key player no matter what one's personal opinion on the French is (personally, I commend them for sticking to their principles and declining to participate in an illegal and immoral war against Iraq).

Does the measure pass and the "Friedmanization" of the European Union begin? Does the measure pass and strengthen Europe economically while preserving the rights of labor and the citizenry?

Does it fail and the EU becomes a faded memory of what could have been? Does it fail and the Euro fails subsequently as a currency, bringing about economic chaos on the continent?

Perhaps I'm being an alarmist here, but I truly care about the future of Europe, and the EU was, in my opinion, the first step toward realizing a new, greater and more prosperous (and more important, politically) Europe.

On to France for a moment, I've heard their economy described as "DeGaulleist Communist," which I think is an accurate descriptor. France seems to have a great mix of command economics and the free market, which is my personal philosophy (similar to Sweden, but they are a different animal altogether). The free market is not the definitive answer and, even though I consider myself a Socialist, I don't believe that the complete elimination of private enterprise is the solution, either. I could also be described as a Social Democrat, but Schroeder's SPD is not the model I would choose; I think he's let the entire German Left down, but he's a hell of a lot better than Angela Merkel or any CDU candidate for that matter.

"Vive le France," aber Europa ueber alles! Cool

vorteks · Posted: Sun May 29, 2005 11:33 pm Post subject:

Raw datas :

Participation : 70%
Yes : 45%
No : 55%

El Casey i m surprised and pleased by your deep understanding of the european constitution issue.

The French voted massively no to the constitutional treatee for the same reason as us citizens voted yes to the neo cons orientations : fear of a globalised economy and nation centric retreat reactions.

To understand the reasons of this moodish move, you need to understand the complexity of the treatee. French workers voted massively against it (80%), as they interpret it as a step further to neo liberalism. As a matter of fact, this treatee instutitionalises the social fundations of the european construction.

The consequences for Europe? They might be positive or negative, depending on how you pecieve the french influence on Europe. France has always been leading the process of unification since the early 50s. The franco-german axis social influence will be now reduced in favor of new entrants, highly liberal, which is precisely what the french leftists thought they would hinder by voting against this new step.

Europe will stay on the basis of the Nice Treatee, which requieres ALL members to agree to vote new laws, which predicts very slow evolutions with 25 members with so important differences in standard of living, taxes and social protection levels.

Personally, I don t think that the jacobin centralist way France is being managed is examplary, leaving too much room for public corporatisms. I like the way scandinavians understand democracy much better and wouldnt mind that this social caring pattern spreads all around Europe.

Camrade · Posted: Sun May 29, 2005 11:43 pm Post subject:

Viva la libre France!!!
no constitution = no problems Wink

PS: that was a joke by the way...)

e · VIP Joined: 23 Apr 2005 Posts: 654

This constitution was doomed from the start from the get go as not too many people within member states aproved of it. The Brits already have their minds set on no too, as well (as it looks like) the Dutch, the Irish, the Belgians and the Scandinavians.

The EU obviously underestimated or misunderstood poltical and economic nationalism and how its still a big deal in Europe.

Casey, you're being too alarmist. Like Vorteks mentioned, as long as the Nice Treaty, the Monetary Union and the Shenegen argreement remain in existance and in force, the EU will still continue to theoretically exist and work.

The only fear: The eurosceptics such as Britain, Denmark, and Sweden might see the French (and possibly the Dutch, Belgian, and Irish) rejection as an excuse to walk out of the EU alltogether, and if that happens, the new entrants might not want to be a part of it anymore.

All I know is, this is a big victory to the neo-cons and the religious conservatives in the US who wait for these kinds of things to happen to point out how Europe is a failuire and past its prime.

cyndy22 · Posted: Mon May 30, 2005 3:20 am Post subject:

Why oh why do E and I seem to clash so much? Right here on this thread as I was reading with great interest OF Vortek's,El Casey's and E's comments, I came slam dunk with yet another bias political anti-American statement from E. I don't object to critical views of US BUT when someone looks at an important national political issue as this, and attempts to claim that US religious conservatives etc. will view this as a victory and that Europe is past it's prime is ludicrous.

El Casey · Posted: Mon May 30, 2005 4:12 am Post subject:

Actually, Cyndy, it's not ludicrous. You don't know how happy I would be to agree with you that it was, but the unfortunate reality is that the current regime, backed by these wonderful religious conservatives who think Jesus would vote for George W. Bush ( Rolling Eyes

) have a great loathing for "Old Europe" due to their refusal to join us in our immoral, unjust and illegal war against Iraq and *gasp* following their own path without US approval. They would love to point out that the US is doing nothing but great, and Europe is "nothing but suck." The US economy is indeed turning in good numbers this month, and the Euro will drop under $1.25 now for sure which, conversely is a good thing. The (greater) European economy has stalled but, in my opinion, this will in turn jump-start export opportunities for European manufacturers in that exports that were formerly (due to Euro value) too expensive becoming affordable in foreign markets.

Furthermore, my earlier alarmism was based on misinformation. Calling this ill-fated economic treaty "the European constitution" is, in my opinion, a grave mistake when it is nothing more than a "Federal European" trade agreement! If it's "business as usual" for the EU based on the Nice Agreement, then I see no problem with the voters (and I am SO pleased that this was a popular election!) rejecting foolish neoliberalist/globalist economic policies and rejecting an unbridled free market, which is NOT the answer for Europe!

If they want to call it the Constitution, then they should restrict it to a declaration of common rights and values, NOT economic stipulations attempting to force a Friedmanist neoliberal "vision" onto the European federation. /end commie rant Razz

cyndy22 · Posted: Mon May 30, 2005 5:20 am Post subject:

OKAY, I haven't read the Constitution. I am however interested in doing so if anyone wants to provide me a website.

I do wonder El Casey about your views. I know you are an intelligent and respectful human being. I don't understand however where you have adopted your new views of world politics. I am not a Bush supporter. I did not vote for son or father. I do not think that neo conservatists or religious conservatives play such an important role here. It is true that economy is the principle factor in politics. Good or bad it is true.

The globalaziation of the world is happening. Quicker than many govt's. expected. I personally think it is a good thing. But if the French do not vote for this constitution, don't blame or infer that the US is so delighted.

You will be a very good journalist. You ar interested, sharp as a whip, determined etc. Just know and I am sure you do- everyone is bias in some shape or form, including Journalists. Smile

renwan · Talk Show Host Joined: 29 Oct 2004 Posts: 204

I could start debating with all of you but i dont have the time atm, just to say:

VIVE LE NON!

a OUI would have supported a consitution which wants to make europe a US-Like country where money comes before eprson and liberties are restringed in favour of the gov, LESS MONEY,MORE PEOPLE!

VIVE LE NON, NEEN! NEIN! NO! NET!

VIVE LE SSE!

vorteks · Posted: Mon May 30, 2005 1:54 pm Post subject:

Here is you link, Cindy

http://www.unizar.es/euroconstitucion/Treaties/Treaty_Const.htm

Only 400 pages, I hope you have time in hands Wink

The complexity of the text is one reason why a referendum doesnt make much sense. A referendum needs easy questions like : integration of Turkey, integration of 10 new eastern entrants, european army, european president, european government...On a 400 pages text, you can interpret whatever you want depending on your political side.

To sum it up a bit, I would say this treaty aims to create a political Europe that could speak a united voice to other global economic powers.

Why did Spaniards vote at 78% for this consitutional treaty while the French reject it?

- 2 reasons :

-Spain benefited from huge european grants to finance its infrastructures while France was one of the main sponsors.

- Our populist leaders have always weighted the responsability of liberal reforms on Europe rather than assuming them, so Europe is being seen by popular classes (employees, workers and civil servants) as the big bad wolf threatening their social security.

2 more countries are likely to answer no to this constitutional offer :

The Dutch for very different reasons. Netherlands, which has been exemplary for decades in terms of integration, suffered recently from very mediatic racial murders. This will be a xenophobic Nee.

The brits for economic and suvereign reasons. Europe is seen as too bureaucratic and centralist, which would weight on the dynamism of the british economy.

As you can see, the answers are not yes or no to a constitution, but yes or no to more Europe, which, as E stated, can be interpreted as nationalist reactions to globalisation.

Geographically, the french nationalist social conservative NO looks very much like the nationalist conservative vote during the american presidential elections. Rural areas and popular classes took a nationalist stance while metropolitan entrepreneurial voters expressed open mindedness.

cyndy22 · Posted: Mon May 30, 2005 7:03 pm Post subject:

Well I for one am of the opinion that the no vote in France is indeed a set back. But likely temperary. The EU Constitution as Vorteks mentioned does need some paring down and fine tuning. I do think that individual European countries such as France, Britain, Ireland , Denmark and Netherlands perhaps need more time, pursuasion and clarification of this complex constitution to get on board. BTW US diplomats in Europe say a strong, unified Europe is very much in the interest of the US, and the administration is hoping the constituion will be ratified.

blaked · Posted: Mon May 30, 2005 8:10 pm Post subject:

I think this is a disaster, because financial markets have so many unanswered questions about Europe's future, which are going to translate into lower growth and smaller capital investments in the European economy. However, the blame for this disaster falls squarely on the heads of Europe's stuffy, centralized bureaucracy in Brussels. As the Economist pointed out, the President of the United States is able to carry a copy of our Constitution in his pocket, because it is small, concise, and to the point. Miles of red tape can only lead to one place: Brussels, with the carefully squeezed revenues of Europe's value added tax and import duty revenues.

Don't get me wrong, I love the idea of a Confederated Europe, with one currency, one common market, one military, and... Twisted Evil

one language. This is mostly because I see the French as spoiled, stagnant socialists who need a kick in the pants from the 'New Europe' (I know the term belongs to the neo-cons, but I like it) - places that need years of catching-up in terms of living standards and infrastructure - Poland, CZ, Slovakia, the Baltics, Hungary, Slovenia, and eventually Croatia and Ukraine. I'd also rather that European dol.. er.. Euros stay in European hands, rather than floating off to Red China.

renwan · Talk Show Host Joined: 29 Oct 2004 Posts: 204

vorteks · Posted: Mon May 30, 2005 11:53 pm Post subject:

Thanks for your concern, blaked, but Europe invests already massively into Europe, and this is precisely what worries the most unskilled part of our population.

I like the diversity of social and economic experiences throughout Europe, which allows different states to copy what works from others while questioning ourselves on what doesnt work. Of course, politics have a better understanding of the future than masses, since they have fewer to fear from it, and this is what is being expressed through those protective votes.

There is no "disaster" tho Rolling Eyes

An earthquake, an atomic war, a chicken flu epidemic are disasters. The integration of what you call the "new europe" does pose many problems to both the founding countries and new entrants, especially since so many of them entered at once. For the most unskilled western workers, it means unfair competition which brings revenue insecurity, for the most unskilled eastern workers, the rise in the cost of living due to western investments is hard to stand. This is a win/win situation on the mid term, as Spain, Greece and Portugal proved, but on the very short term, and one year is a very short term, it is very stressful situation.

A referendum asking the populations if they agreed with the extension of the E.U eastwards might have prevented this problem. The decision was made by politics, not peoples.

Anyways, the current situation is 9xYES, 1xNO. If 20 countries out of 25 give a positive answer to the question, the constitution might be amended and passed. I don t see any new entrants refusing the constitution, since they benefit from massive western investments. The 5 black ships might be France, GB, Netherlands, Denmark and Ireland, which is not enough to dig it up. Sweden chose a parliament ratification (certainly chilled by their euro referendum), which means an automatic yes.

wavetossed · WayToRussified Joined: 27 Jun 2004 Posts: 337

Overall, there is nothing bad about this vote. Maybe the markets will drop a bit. That is good because people will make money on the downswing and make money again on the upswing. No lasting negative impact.

The major impact will be on European politics. Now the way forward is less clear which means a lot more discussion, negotiation and an overall higher profile for EU politics within the union. This is a GOOD thing. It will also likely lead to a line in the sand on EU expansion which means that Turkey will never join.

Bulgaria and Romania are so close to joining that I think that they will not be blocked. Croatia is an interesting question as are the rest of the Balkans. I think that they will end up in the EU in some form due to the need to limit their potential for starting yet another European war.

Basically, people are beginning to say that the EU is reaching its limits in size and complexity. It is getting too hard to manage and we want governments to solve some national problems in a lasting way, not just keep cranking the handle and making the pot bigger and bigger. Expansion is easy. Solving the quality of life issues in our countries is harder. but we can't evade them any longer.