Two-speed EU?

[Quildavyr]

The future is dark I guess

 

[ArneHD]

There is already a "Two-Speed" EU: the EU proper and EEA.

 

[Winner]

The point is, Winner, you're going to have to convince the people, not the governments, that integration is in their interest. And while you can probably convince the young people on this board -- most of whom having grown up not knowing a Europe that wasn't integrated in some way -- you'll have a much tougher job of convincing the baby boomers (you know, the people who actually go out and vote...).

There are things which can't be done now and which we can't afford to wait for.

I really disagree that you first need the people and only then you can have a federal state. I favour the opposite approach, first build the federation and then convince the people that it is good for them. It's easier and most (if not all) of today's countries were created this way.

Once we have a federation, democratic, working federation in which people would vote for their representatives in the parliament, who'll have real power, than you can expect them to take the EU seriously. Then you can forge their identity.

Today, it's up to the minority of convinced Europeans to make this 'dream' come true, whatever it takes.

 

[zjl56]

To me, it seems that people vote according to how what they see the E.U ultimately as. While I see a ton of support on this board for a common defense initiative and a more centralized bureaucracy, I just don't see this as the case for the large or plural majority. While you guys have achieved unprecedented integration, nationalism will never cease, and any percieved or misconnoated threat will be quickly struck down due to this nationalism. So if you wish to achieve larger a common defense force, it probably will have to be disorganized in its core, or along the lines of Nato.

 

[jessiecat]

http://www.ipsos.fr/CanalIpsos/poll/8074.asp

Reason for no:

1)I don't like the social and economic situation in France = 52% (ie I don't like the government domestic policy, so I vote no to piss the government)

2) It's to liberal = 40%, I disagree, but on topic. Despite I'm not sure the new parts of the constitution (compared to former treaties) was really about this issue.

3) So we can negociate it again = 39% (of course, after years of negociations, all the other countries will be happy to listen to the whinning French and change everything so the French alone are happy)

4) So we can oppose the entry of Turkey in EU = 35%. I don't remember Turkey being mentionned in the constitution

5) It is a threat for France identity = 32%. I disagree, but I can accept this argument, it is on topic.

6) You want to show your discontent to the politicians in general = 31%

7) The results of the EU building is negative for France = 27%. I disagree also, but this is also on topic.

8) It is an opportunity to oppose the government and Jacques Chirac = 24%

So, out of 8 main arguments, I consider only 3 are related to the topic.


And now, if you scroll down further:

Are you ready to support further European construction : yes = 72%, no = 23%

So I maintain that the French people didn't reject the constitution because they are not in favour of EU

Thanks for the stats. I agree that many of the reasons the French voted down the treaty were specific French concerns and they are not, as a whole, anti-EU in their general attitude.

Would you also agree with me that the Irish are not "stupid" people but had their own reasons for voting down the constitution and who are not anti-EU either?

We could all go down Winner's road and label people who disagree with us as "stupid" but we don't, do we? I hope we're a bit more civilised than that.

 

[Winner]

Which isn't helped by people like Winner who dismiss one of the most-educated populations
of people in the world, the Irish, as "too stupid" to understand the proposed treaty.
In fact, the opposite may well be true. It could be the less -educated voters of Central Europe
who blindly go along with whatever their government tells them and believe every extravagant promise that is made who are really the "stupid" ones.

Actually, after forty years of communism, people here are one of the most sceptical and anti-everything_the_government_says voters on the continents. You'd know that if you followed the US missile defense row.

And I dismiss the opinion as well as I dismiss similar nonsense in this country or wherever else.

Is it any accident that the most sophisticated electorates of Western Europe like the English,
the French, the Dutch, the Danes and the Irish are the most sceptical about the supposed
"benefits" of greater European unity?
How dare you, Winner, insulting the people of Ireland like that!
Where is Red Ralph when we need him most?

I don't "insult" anybody in Western Europe more than I "insult" people here. I am very cosmopolitan in this respect I don't insult the people, I insult the stupid and stubborn belief that referendum is the only way how to make democracy.

Thanks for the stats. I agree that many of the reasons the French voted down the treaty were specific French concerns and they are not, as a whole, anti-EU in their general attitude.

Would you also agree with me that the Irish are not "stupid" people but had their own reasons for voting down the constitution and who are not anti-EU either?

Stupid reasons, based on ignorance, fears, arrogance and other useless emotions. Facts? Who cares.

We could all go down Winner's road and label people who disagree with us as "stupid" but we don't, do we? I hope we're a bit more civilised than that.

Next time you read what I really write before accusing me of such crap.

 

[philippe]

But then again, some of the reasons to vote "no" belonged in another election. That's why the result tastes so bitter.

 

[jessiecat]

Actually, after forty years of communism, people here are one of the most sceptical and anti-everything_the_government_says voters on the continents. You'd know that if you followed the US missile defense row.

And I dismiss the opinion as well as I dismiss similar nonsense in this country or wherever else.



I don't "insult" anybody in Western Europe more than I "insult" people here. I am very cosmopolitan in this respect I don't insult the people, I insult the stupid and stubborn belief that referendum is the only way how to make democracy.



Stupid reasons, based on ignorance, fears, arrogance and other useless emotions. Facts? Who cares.



Next time you read what I really write before accusing me of such crap.

"The Irish voters were stupid enough to vote down the Lisbon Treaty"

Did you say that, or not?

 

[Eniotna]

I'm starting to like this idea too.

 

[Steph]

Thanks for the stats. I agree that many of the reasons the French voted down the treaty were specific French concerns and they are not, as a whole, anti-EU in their general attitude.

Would you also agree with me that the Irish are not "stupid" people but had their own reasons for voting down the constitution and who are not anti-EU either?

The same as I considered that 3/8 of the reasons for the French NO were not stupid, while 5/8 were stupid, I can grant you that some of the Irish who voted no were not stupid and had a valid reason (by valid I mean something I may not agree with, but related to EU and that can be a concern for them).
But you'll have to grant me than another part were indeed stupid
Now, let's wait for a Irish to give us stats similar to what I gave, to see who are the most stupid, the Irish or the French.
But beware, the French are very good at this game.

 

[Winner]

"The Irish voters were stupid enough to vote down the Lisbon Treaty"

Did you say that, or not?

Ah, I see, you have a trouble with understanding it.

So, did I say: "Irish voters are stupid" or "Irish people are stupid" ? No, I said that they made a stupid decision. In other words, fairly intelligent people are always capable of doing stupid things.

Unfortunately, there is this trend that the more people you have together, the stupider their decisions are. Mob mentality, mob justice, mob democracy...

 

[jessiecat]

Ah, I see, you have a trouble with understanding it.

So, did I say: "Irish voters are stupid" or "Irish people are stupid" ? No, I said that they made a stupid decision. In other words, fairly intelligent people are always capable of doing stupid things.

Unfortunately, there is this trend that the more people you have together, the stupider their decisions are. Mob mentality, mob justice, mob democracy...

I could accept your explanation if you could admit that disagreeing with you
does not necessarily mean they made a "stupid decision".

 

[Oruc]

Its a stupid idea

 

[lovett]

Unfortunately, there is this trend that the more people you have together, the stupider their decisions are. Mob mentality, mob justice, mob democracy...

No, Not really.

 

[Shekwan]

OK a two speed EU. So the core countries are federalised and go off on military adventures together and relive the good old days of european imperialism. While the ''periphery'' enjoy all the benefits of economic integration whilst not having an obligation to common defense/foreign policy.

Sounds like a pretty sweet deal to me...

 

[kronic]

I've always been in favour of a multi-speed EU. It was a big mistake to let so many new members in before enacting serious institutional reforms. In the EU of 27+ members, somebody will always say no and the moment one nation says no, somebody else will come around and exploit the situation. The only solution to this is to let Greater Britain (=Britain + other Eurosceptics) stay out of political integration and take away their capability to block further steps.

 

[Shekwan]

I've always been in favour of a multi-speed EU. It was a big mistake to let so many new members in before enacting serious institutional reforms. In the EU of 27+ members, somebody will always say no and the moment one nation says no, somebody else will come around and exploit the situation. The only solution to this is to let Greater Britain (=Britain + other Eurosceptics) stay out of political integration and take away their capability to block further steps.

So greater britain includes Ireland, scandinavia, and anyone who doesn't agree with europhiles. Is this post meant to be anything other than inflammatory?

 

[Winner]

I could accept your explanation if you could admit that disagreeing with you
does not necessarily mean they made a "stupid decision".

Many people disagree with me and they can't all be stupid

On the other hand, they should admit that they made a wrong decision, because I do try (occasionaly) to admit my mistakes. Hell, this thread starts with me admitting a mistake.

 

[Winner]

OK a two speed EU. So the core countries are federalised and go off on military adventures together and relive the good old days of european imperialism. While the ''periphery'' enjoy all the benefits of economic integration whilst not having an obligation to common defense/foreign policy.

Sounds like a pretty sweet deal to me...

How on Earth does closely integrated EU mean "return to the good old days of european imperialism"? Explain, because that sounds utterly ridiculous.

 

[T!ck]

A two speed EU is a great idea.

If it were to happen then maybe by the 2050's/60's when what remains of the UK (assuming Scotland will get independance and maybe Wales/ Northern Ireland also leave UK) and other nations oppsed to integration who by now are just pawns, being bullied by the USA, Russia and China, will realise that EU was the way to go.