RE: Not everyone wants it...

RE: Not everyone wants it... (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

WantsOfTheFlesh -> RE: Not everyone wants it... (5/4/2013 5:23:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thezeppo I think the American model is the most obvious example to follow if one were interested in greater political integration in Europe. The constitution was rejected though, so where to start? It appears as though Europe doesn't really want greater integration, in which case someone needs to come up with a plan B pretty fast! reckon a solution could b stripping tha eu back to`tha intensive mutual cooperation framework, like how it started wit tha ole steel & coal treaties coz i reckon tha moves to a 1 size fits all germanic model will fuck it up.

Politesub53 -> RE: Not everyone wants it... (5/4/2013 5:27:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: WantsOfTheFlesh reckon stripping tha eu back to its framework of intensive mutual cooperation could work, like how it started wit tha ole steel & coal treaties instead of unification to a 1 size fits all model . This is exactly what the British people were led to believe prior to the original referendum. That the EU was to be no more than a common market. If the public had been informed that the EU would end up making European wide laws (as was known by politicians at the time) there would have been a "No" vote.

MrRodgers -> RE: Not everyone wants it... (5/4/2013 7:30:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic I do think that proportional representation would better serve the needs of my country, than what we are getting with the present two-party system. The election result of the OP is a nice example of what can happen when another party or parties no longer meet the expectations of the represented. I'd like to see the Senate changed back to State-chosen representatives, and/or a law mandating one Senator from each of the two main parties. The Senate would be back to representing the States, and there would always be a 50-50 split among Democrats/Republicans. Make passage required to be 60 votes in favor and you'll require bipartisan legislation. It will certainly bog down in the near term, but it should help defuse partisan politics to some extent. So that's where you would part from history and the constitution in which it describes only a majority is necessary and specifies the only time it doesn't it.

tweakabelle -> RE: Not everyone wants it... (5/4/2013 7:54:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 quote: ORIGINAL: WantsOfTheFlesh reckon stripping tha eu back to its framework of intensive mutual cooperation could work, like how it started wit tha ole steel & coal treaties instead of unification to a 1 size fits all model . This is exactly what the British people were led to believe prior to the original referendum. That the EU was to be no more than a common market. If the public had been informed that the EU would end up making European wide laws (as was known by politicians at the time) there would have been a "No" vote. I doubt if there will ever be a meaningful referendum on EU membership. My suspicion is that the the Tories have found anti-European sentiment a useful way of diverting discontent into votes, and a clever negotiating tactic to adopt with the EU ("If you don't do as we want, we'll hold a referendum and might leave ....."). The economic (and political) consequences of a UK departure from the EU are of such a magnitude, and so negative that it won't ever happen. I don't really see that the UK has a future outside of the EU. While the momentum towards European integration has stalled due to the economic crisis, I suspect it is unlikely to go into reverse.

thezeppo -> RE: Not everyone wants it... (5/5/2013 1:41:52 AM)
I can't remember the title of it now, but there was an interesting program on years ago. The producers took a street and asked every resident whether they were for or against. The majority were against. They then had a week of solid campaigning from 'yes' and 'no' camps - just on this street - and by the end of the week the residents had swung to yes. This was related to the Euro rather than EU membership, but I do think it shows that with a properly organised campaign the euroscepticism of Britain can be overcome. On the other hand, I and the other 26 members of my politics A level class (and teachers) were once treated to a meal in London, by an MEP who flat out told us he was putting it on his expenses. Some modification is definitely needed. I would be in favour of a stipped-back model such as Wants describes, more because I think political integration has lost its credibility than anything else.

thezeppo -> RE: Not everyone wants it... (5/5/2013 1:45:46 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 quote: ORIGINAL: WantsOfTheFlesh reckon stripping tha eu back to its framework of intensive mutual cooperation could work, like how it started wit tha ole steel & coal treaties instead of unification to a 1 size fits all model . This is exactly what the British people were led to believe prior to the original referendum. That the EU was to be no more than a common market. If the public had been informed that the EU would end up making European wide laws (as was known by politicians at the time) there would have been a "No" vote. If you don't mind me asking, how do you know the Tories knew the EU would be expanded beyond its remit? That's an interesting snippet of information.

Politesub53 -> RE: Not everyone wants it... (5/5/2013 4:52:39 AM)
Not just the Tories Zeppo, all of them new. Especially Ted Heath though. I cant recall the article I read but I will try and find something online.

thezeppo -> RE: Not everyone wants it... (5/5/2013 5:07:51 AM)
Yeah that was a bit disingenuous of me, I had it in my head that Labour were anti-Europe at the time but having just done a bit of reading I have seen that appeared to be limited to the more hardcore left of the party. My memory is obviously hazy on that front, I will apportion equal blame to Harold Wilson and the like.

Politesub53 -> RE: Not everyone wants it... (5/5/2013 6:12:39 AM)
No worries Zeppo. Many consider Thatcher to have been anti EU but she wasnt originally. Ted Heath led us in knowing there were plans for a single currency, he didnt even tell his closest cabinet members. Wilson came to power in 1974 (The last time I voted Labour iirc) and his party didnt want a referendum. It was a conservative MP who pushed for it (forget who) labour were mostly split on it. Roy Jenkins resigned when a referendum was announced. Wilson and co pushed for it and as you rightly say, the hard left were against it. EVERY daily newspaper except the communist Morning Star supported it. Tony Benn, Peter Shore, Micheal Foot were about the only top Labour members for a no vote. The Daily Mirror even slagged them off big time, especially Benn. Heath had gone but Thatcher now led a solid Conservative party for a yes vote. As did the Liberal Party and every other party except the Communists. The CBI and big business ploughed millions into a yes campaign, swearing there would be no job loses. It didnt take long for factories to start closing and importing cheaper goods made in the EU. This is what everyone forgets when blaming Thatcher for the loss of industry. It started in the late sixties, indedd even after WW2 and went downhill from there. Maggie at least woke up and smelt the coffee. Tweaks, you are right about Cameron, but both parties use the EU, stay in get out, as a spectre above the nation. here are two interesting articles on the topic. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/columnists/article-228953/HOW-FOR-40-YEARS-THE-BRITISH-PUBLIC-HAS-BEEN-LIED-TO--.html http://conservativehome.blogs.com/platform/2013/01/lord-lexden-forty-years-ago-britain-entered-the-eec-on-edward-heaths-false-prospectus.html

thezeppo -> RE: Not everyone wants it... (5/6/2013 2:45:06 AM)
Interesting, thanks for the links. It has on many occasions seemed that the end has justified the means when European integration has been discussed or acted upon, and some major decisions have been made behind closed doors. I wonder if we would have seen such a rise in euroscepticism if these decisions had been made in a more democratic, accountable way. For a democratic institution to work there has to be a sense of accountability, and that is certainly something lacking within the EU. Is it any wonder that when a rare opportunity to have a voice comes along we vote to slow the whole thing down? Lets not get back into Thatcher!

Politesub53 -> RE: Not everyone wants it... (5/6/2013 3:50:53 AM)
I think the Thatcher point is very interesting and cant be left out of any EU debate. It shows what was promised, wasnt exactly what was envisaged. Its also interesting that while the left wing of the Labour party were against the EU, many of them ended up being for it. I think you are spot on with your analysis. The lack of democratic transparency has led many Europeans, not just those in the UK, to lose heart with the EU as a single entity. Cameron, in my view, is committing the biggest sin of all ald sitting on the fence. Here are a couple of the current Labour left views on the EU. http://www.labourleft.co.uk/the-eu-far-from-perfect-but-right-now-better-than-the-alternatives/ http://www.labourleft.co.uk/camerons-weakness-and-labours-opportunity-an-inout-referendum-on-the-eu/

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125