01-06-05

112 (E) [EU politics] - A French Kiss and a Dutch Treat.

Democracy is a multi-splendored thing. The French said "No" to the European draft constitution (EDC), and doing so, they threw the Euro down the scales on the financial markets. That means fewer Pesos as collateral damage to the legion of poor Filipino families that depend on Euros sent home by the many Overseas Filipino Workers. Less oil for the European buck. More expensive Chinese T-shirts on the other hand; defying China on the textile issue will be less urgent. Allons Enfants de la Patrie.

The French said "No" doing the right thing for the wrong reasons. The French socialists didn't like the EDC because it was "too liberal, too globalistic, too capitalist, too Anglo-Saxon" and of course because they didn't like Giscard. One can wonder if they actually read the EDC beyond page 5. Because the EDC is not what they claim. The Americans needed 7+10 articles for their founding paper, the European mandarins needed a staggering 59+54, just falling short of exactly prescribing the butter content in chocolate and the maximum price of croissants. The EDC is all but liberal (read "Size does matter" here).

The EU mandarins harvested the bitter fruits of decades of bureaucratic directives they poured over the heads of their stifled subjects. Maastricht and the Euro were stuffed down our throat, now the Belgian government even denied us the right to vote about the EDC itself because it was too technical and because they were afraid we would say "Neen/Non/Nein" for the "wrong" reasons too. To save democracy from the ignorant people, so to speak. The French were given the chance and they sent the enlightened absolute EU oligarchs back to square one. For now, that is.
There was no Plan B, but as it turned out, there was a Contingency D; D for Democracy, but it wasn't a Plan.

The EU needs new rules (e.g. majority vote) because it became too large.
Right. Why did it burst out of its seams anyways? Did we ask for the Polish, that are only after the Brussels pork barrels and after stealing our used cars, but draw the American card for the rest? Did we ask for the Romanians, the Bulgarians, and the Albanians? Let them organize their own EEU (Eastern European Union); culturally and economically they are further away from us than the Philippines (read "Cold Turkey" here). And now Georgia and the Ukraine are greedily knocking on the EU door. Sure, there is always room for one more. Their farmers are lurking at the EU farm-subsidy pots too. The founding EU states must have deep pockets indeed, and a Mother Theresa complex.

Although there are some historical and cultural arguments (Poland e.g. that, by means of the Red Army, stole half of pre-war German territory) to include Czechia, Slovakia, Poland, Hungary and the Baltic States into the EU, the very well paid Eurocrats could have least have waited until these countries attained a wealth level comparable to that of the EU. What our Eurocrats did May last year, was bring job-destroying globalization inside our own gates.
"'k Stond erbij en ik keek ernaar".

Did we ask for, God forbid, Turkey? Yes, Turkey, the Islamic Asian nation. Do we need a common border with Iraq? Do we need more Muslims in our Western European cities? Do we need more Anatolian peasants in our suburbs? Let them forge their own Greater Turkistan (read the article of A. Monteyne here, in Dutch), in tune with history and with their own culture. Does the US accept Mexico as its 51-th state? Does it tear down the fences between San Diego and Tijuana?

What happened to the EFTA (European Free Trade Association) after all? Nobody denies a Greater Turkistan and a Far-Eastern European Union (Russia included) zero trade tariffs, development aid and even controlled and limited quality immigration. After all, we paid for the cleaning-up of Chernobyl and we will pay for the AIDS outbreak in Libya. But they are not part of the Western Europe that we built the last 200 years or so.
As a famous Belgian politician once said: "Trop is too much, and too much is trop". The French voters made that quite clear last Sunday. And the Dutch voters wil do it today.


Photo: (click to enlarge) Would you like this city to be in the EU? No, it's not Bucharest, Romania, - but Manila, Philippines. Picture taken today in the Glorieta Ayala malls, Makati, Metro Manila.

06:01 Gepost door VH | Permalink | Commentaren (3) |  Facebook |

Commentaren

you got some things wrong
I have to take this guy to cleaners for some things.

On Thu, 2 Jun 2005 19:28:16 +0200, "Heinrich" <Heinrich@Mailgate.org.> wrote:

>The EU needs new rules (e.g. majority vote) because it became too large.
>Right. Why did it burst out of its seams anyways? Did we ask for the Polish,
>that are only after the Brussels pork barrels and after stealing our used
>cars, but draw the American card for the rest?

Rest assured that more people here were afraid about being used
as market for heavily subsidized Western food than counted on
pork barrel funded at the expense of Western European taxpayer.

Blame Brussels with its subsidize-and-regulate mentality,
for that bad policy of "common pot" that every country has
to pay into, and then Brussels pays out thevery same money,
albeit in different proportions, which obviously fues the hostility
over division of that money like nothing else could.

That makes relations between nations more contentious than
ever precisely at the time when support for the union is most
necessary.

This is the worst policy I could ever think of. It is precisely
opposite to what needs to be done: finance ONLY pan-European
projects from common budget, e.g. EU border.

>Did we ask for the Romanians,
>the Bulgarians, and the Albanians? Let them organize their own EEU (Eastern
>European Union); culturally and economically they are further away from us
>than the Philippines (read "Cold Turkey" here).

I suggest that guy did not get around here much. I found e.g. the Dutch (didn't meet many Belgians) much more compatible culturally
with us than I think a Dutchman with a Spaniard or an Irishman
seem to be.

>And now Georgia and the
>Ukraine are greedily knocking on the EU door. Sure, there is always room for
>one more. Their farmers are lurking at the EU farm-subsidy pots too. The
>founding EU states must have deep pockets indeed, and a Mother Theresa
>complex.

Then cut it. No more subsidies to farmers, no more EU subsidies to
anyone. E.g. French farmers absolutely hate CAP. Let each country
finance its own subsidies if it likes to.

>Although there are some historical and cultural arguments (Poland e.g. that,
>by means of the Red Army, stole half of pre-war German territory)

As well as we lost more of our pre-war Eastern territories than
we gain from Germany. Which I think is rather hypocritical to
defend given the role it played in WWII.

>to include
>Czechia, Slovakia, Poland, Hungary and the Baltic States into the EU, the
>very well paid Eurocrats could have least have waited until these countries
>attained a wealth level comparable to that of the EU. What our Eurocrats did
>May last year, was bring job-destroying globalization inside our own gates.

There's no such thing as "job destroying globalization". You merely
misunderstand economics of trade. Trade doesn't destroy overall
employment. "globalization" is merely a new curse word invented by
maniacs for extensive intl commerce that is as old as mankind is.

>"'k Stond erbij en ik keek ernaar".

>Did we ask for, God forbid, Turkey? Yes, Turkey, the Islamic Asian nation.
>Do we need a common border with Iraq? Do we need more Muslims in our Western
>European cities? Do we need more Anatolian peasants in our suburbs? Let them
>forge their own Greater Turkistan , in tune with history and with their own
>culture.

Here I am with you. I would have no problem with admitting Ukraine or Russia into EU (once they get their crime and transparency in govts
under control, no sooner), because those people actually are highly
compatible with other European cultures. More than you think.

I also have been to Turkey - and no, I would NOT like to see them
in EU.

Gepost door: b | 02-06-05

reaction Thank you so much for your elaborated reaction on my weblog post.
Technology is not on my side here, in the Philippines, but I will try to copy your reaction to my laptop, read it properly, and give some reaction.
My posts are often on the controversial and outspoken side, on a weblog one can say more than in a conventional pamphlet. In fact, I was summing up the ideas (or mis-ideas, or even prejudices) that I perceive with many voters in Western Europe. Hearing the reactions in street-interviews (on BBC worldnews for instance) I just heard an echo of my post.
The average voter is not that much concerned with fundamentals, but with for instance, the Eastern-European gangs that rob our houses and cars for years, the arrogant position of the Muslims (which account for most of the street-crime, especially in Holland), and - of course - his job.
In fact, the European constitution was not the issue. It was just an occasion to ventilate frustrations about the major democratic deficit of the EU. Apart from my reservations with the constitution (it's too bureaucratic, and too large), I would have voted yes anyway.
Anyways, thank you so much for your well-written reaction!
Yrs, VH

PS - your email address didn't work, I hope you can read this.

Gepost door: VH | 03-06-05

email My email address is abby43@poczta.onet.pl, it should work. I'm sorry to hear about car theft, it's a big problem in Poland, too.

Gepost door: b | 03-06-05

De commentaren zijn gesloten.