Nicolas Sarkozy plans to bypass Irish no vote

JordyWordy

Heineken Helen wrote:

why? I thought we weren't giving up our independence or national sovereignty

not trying to ruffle feathers helen, but when you refer to national sovereignty what exactly do you mean? i follow most of your points and then when you start talking about this it gets fairly circular, and i genuinely cant tell if you just didnt want our influence within the EU diminidhed by the treaty or if youre anti-EU....again, its a genuine question. nothing meant by it.

i think sovereignty is a pretty elusive concept about a countrys ability to do something...yet you refer to it quite specifically and frequently...what exactly do you think it is?

nobody

Heineken Helen wrote:

Nope, that's more like a line... a straight line

Why DOESN'T germany complain more about how much they've to pay? I know we're going to paying more and more but that's only right and it's only to be expected.

well, one reason...many people don't know;)
second, people know that by investing in other countries they will be put in a position to buy german products...thus german firms and workers gain in the long run...also, the money helps stabilising the countries making them less likely to drift to radicalism etc....
so I guess, the benefits outweigh the costs...

this here threat seems to be friendlier than the other;) maybe because it has sarkozy in its title??;)

m.

lgt

Heineken Helen wrote:

Nope, that's more like a line... a straight line

Why DOESN'T germany complain more about how much they've to pay? I know we're going to paying more and more but that's only right and it's only to be expected.

Germany historically has been one of the most pro-European countries.

They actually view the whole European project not just as a mere economic free trade area - which incidentally it is not what the founding fathers of the EU wanted either.

Reading what Jean Monnet, Schuman and Alfredo Spinelli had to say would be a revelation!

lgt

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Coal_and_Steel_Community

nobody

JordyWordy wrote:

not trying to ruffle feathers helen, but when you refer to national sovereignty what exactly do you mean? i follow most of your points and then when you start talking about this it gets fairly circular, and i genuinely cant tell if you just didnt want our influence within the EU diminidhed by the treaty or if youre anti-EU....again, its a genuine question. nothing meant by it.

i think sovereignty is a pretty elusive concept about a countrys ability to do something...yet you refer to it quite specifically and frequently...what exactly do you think it is?

also one thing to consider: within the EU Ireland might be more influencial and "powerful" (in a positive way...not weaponwise;)) than by itself...

m.

Heineken Helen

JordyWordy wrote:

not trying to ruffle feathers helen, but when you refer to national sovereignty what exactly do you mean? i follow most of your points and then when you start talking about this it gets fairly circular, and i genuinely cant tell if you just didnt want our influence within the EU diminidhed by the treaty or if youre anti-EU....again, its a genuine question. nothing meant by it.

i think sovereignty is a pretty elusive concept about a countrys ability to do something...yet you refer to it quite specifically and frequently...what exactly do you think it is?

That was in reply to LGT's posts... cos several people have said earlier that we won't lose that... and I never commented cos that's a route I'm not going to go down cos I simply don't know. But she suggested that we shouldn't have joined if we didn't wanna lose it... I wanted to know what she meant.

Heineken Helen

nobody wrote:

well, one reason...many people don't know;)
second, people know that by investing in other countries they will be put in a position to buy german products...thus german firms and workers gain in the long run...also, the money helps stabilising the countries making them less likely to drift to radicalism etc....
so I guess, the benefits outweigh the costs...

this here threat seems to be friendlier than the other;) maybe because it has sarkozy in its title??;)

m.

guess that's why there are Lidl and Aldi's all over the place then. Good points!

Heineken Helen

lgt wrote:

They actually view the whole European project not just as a mere economic free trade area -

but as what?

lgt

Heineken Helen wrote:

That was in reply to LGT's posts... cos several people have said earlier that we won't lose that... and I never commented cos that's a route I'm not going to go down cos I simply don't know. But she suggested that we shouldn't have joined if we didn't wanna lose it... I wanted to know what she meant.

I actually thought you were joking and conceded the point because obviously if you join a supranational organisation you give up certain national rights.

Nobody and I never argued that you never lose it...

lgt

Heineken Helen wrote:

but as what?

"an ever closer union"

which is what the whole political European process of integration is all about.

If you want just free trade area, you can do like Norway and join EFTA.

Hence, the previous point that there are already different-tier Europe.

No one is imposing the type of membership on anyone.

JordyWordy

nobody wrote:

I never said it's a truer form of democracy...I said decisions made by referendums and a representative parliament are equally democratic.

but if the people are undemocratic themselves. eg. not wanting homosexuals in government, then I can live with the leading parties not even making that offer in their programmes...
it's a tricky question, and not so black and white, better or worse. I don't think it is undemocratic if a parliament is elected then there is a serial killer on the lose and everybody is in support of the death penalty all of a sudden for 5 months, and the parliament doesn't represent the (temporary) will of the people here...

m.

well you said it wasnt appropriate form of democracy for votes on the EU. which has some merit. but i think the point about "people bueing undemocratic themselves" doesnt make ANY sense. Democracy doesnt require full voting numbers. It is designed so that people can choose to vote, (either lazily or responsibly) and deal with the consequences. that was respected here, people here knew of the consequences. but we wont just vote yes to keep 26 foreign governments happy. that would not be democracy, it would be irresponsible of the people to not vote freely.

and your analogy, like Collin said, doesnt make any sense whatsoever.

you have no factual or statistical basis for your claim of "undemocratic people" or undemocratic voting.


You say you are happy to trust your elected politicians, but when you are in the situation that you have to vote, and your leaders are lying and contradicting themselves about the treaty in televised debates etc....then you tell me one good reason why you would fail to responsibly & logically analyse the situation in your own mind?
in that situation i think its more responsible for voters to research the issue themselves as best they can, and thats what most people in Ireland did.

JordyWordy

nobody wrote:

also one thing to consider: within the EU Ireland might be more influencial and "powerful" (in a positive way...not weaponwise;)) than by itself...

m.

Cool. i understand that completely. I didnt see the original posts in which it was raised, so was curious as to what HH was referring to. i get that now.

nobody

JordyWordy wrote:

well you said it wasnt appropriate form of democracy for votes on the EU. which has some merit. but i think the point about "people bueing undemocratic themselves" doesnt make ANY sense. Democracy doesnt require full voting numbers. It is designed so that people can choose to vote, (either lazily or responsibly) and deal with the consequences. that was respected here, people here knew of the consequences. but we wont just vote yes to keep 26 foreign governments happy. that would not be democracy, it would be irresponsible of the people to not vote freely.

and your analogy, like Collin said, doesnt make any sense whatsoever.

you have no factual or statistical basis for your claim of "undemocratic people" or undemocratic voting.


You say you are happy to trust your elected politicians, but when you are in the situation that you have to vote, and your leaders are lying and contradicting themselves about the treaty in televised debates etc....then you tell me one good reason why you would fail to responsibly & logically analyse the situation in your own mind?
in that situation i think its more responsible for voters to research the issue themselves as best they can, and thats what most people in Ireland did.

I respect the Irish referendum!!!!!!!!!!!!
it was the APROPRIATE form of decision making in Ireland, as its constitution requieres it. all I'm saying is that if other countries come to accept the treaty or another one later NOT by referendum, but by a decisions of the parliament, nobody as the right to claim it is undemocratic or not reflecting the (temporary) will of the people...
don't belittle representative democracy as an inferior form of democracy...is ALL I'm saying in that particular line of my reasoning.

m.

nobody

JordyWordy wrote:

Cool. i understand that completely. I didnt see the original posts in which it was raised, so was curious as to what HH was referring to. i get that now.

what do you mean?:)
I lost the...thread;)

m.

lgt

JordyWordy wrote:

but we wont just vote yes to keep 26 foreign governments happy. that would not be democracy, it would be irresponsible of the people to not vote freely.

No one ever claimed that you should have!

JordyWordy

nobody wrote:

I respect the Irish referendum!!!!!!!!!!!!
it was the APROPRIATE form of decision making in Ireland, as its constitution requieres it. all I'm saying is that if other countries come to accept the treaty or another one later NOT by referendum, but by a decisions of the parliament, nobody as the right to claim it is undemocratic or not reflecting the (temporary) will of the people...
don't belittle representative democracy as an inferior form of democracy...is ALL I'm saying in that particular line of my reasoning.

m.

cool, i can dig that.

JordyWordy

lgt wrote:

No one ever claimed that you should have!

Actually, the Irish politicians here did!

JordyWordy

nobody wrote:

what do you mean?:)
I lost the...thread;)

m.

nice

nobody

JordyWordy wrote:

nice

I hope you're not fooling with me;)
the italians driving around all over town make me dizzy so I can't judge it myself right now;)

m.

nobody

I think a major problem I had here and which made me post was the notion that I and all other eu citizens should be thankful to ireland that they voted against the treaty on our behalf, cause we are in the claws of our governments and couldn't help ourselves. WHILE FACTUALLY the main reasons that the irish voted 'no' are in most cases domestic and almost only concern Irish interests.
yet, even the title of helen's other threat suggests that she thinks she was voting on the behalf of other nations, while she is mostly concered with irish neutrality and sovereignty!!! (the reason, I guess, she thinks she did all of europe a favour might be that in the future europe might possibly become a dangerous superpower, that's the only reason that I can remember that goes beyond irish policy)
that's why I argued the irish aren't the last bastion of democracy in europe and that decisions arrived at via different ways than just referendums aren't any less (or more) democratic. I learned about the massive Irish pride. okay, but the claims made here were just one number too big.

I think those are valid critizisms (not just opinions;)). my motivation really wasn't to complain about the irish vote. I respect it. my complaint is the (dramatic and partly overblown) way it which it was portrayed as europe's last hope.

oh, and out of sheer interest. you (Ireland) are neutral. so what happens if the united kingdom (with dunkman in the lead;)) attacks you and everyone else stays neutral. will you be able to defend yourself all on your own?
really, just a question, cause I have no idea how this works...

m.