Von
http://www.watsonblogs.org/jfichter/#a000428
"
Non to Nee
Contratulations to the people of France. Yesterday you saved Europe.
For many the French vote against the EU constitution seems a snub to
progress and to Europe's ever-closer union. But I see as a
declaration of independence from Brussels, one the Dutch are set to
repeat in a few days' time (and the British, too, though one doubts
it will even come to a referendum there).
There was alwauys something inherently undemocratic about the EU
constitution, a constitution drawn up by an unelected commission that
then harangued Europe into accepting it. The implicit, and sometimes
explicit, message was always that "non"-voters were Luddites at best
(to use an Anglo-Saxon metaphor), and probably much worse.
Most nations, like Germany, didn't even bother with a referendum,
merely approving the new treaty in parliament. Their people were left
with a government they didn't ask for, that they weren't consulted
on, and over which they had only limited control.
Contrast this with the United States's own experience in more perfect
union--an elected convention whose final creation was voted on in all
thirteen states, and one which survived initial rejection by several
of them.
There is nothing wrong, nothing immoral, unwise, or inefficient,
about the French people not wishing to cede national sovereignty to
the European center. There is nothing wrong about the French wanting
to be free.
When Europe's leaders meet on June 16, perhaps this time they will
remember that they represent democracies. The new constitution should
express the bottom-up sentiment of a free people, not dictated will
coming from the top down."
http://www.watsonblogs.org/jfichter/#a000428
"
Non to Nee
Contratulations to the people of France. Yesterday you saved Europe.
For many the French vote against the EU constitution seems a snub to
progress and to Europe's ever-closer union. But I see as a
declaration of independence from Brussels, one the Dutch are set to
repeat in a few days' time (and the British, too, though one doubts
it will even come to a referendum there).
There was alwauys something inherently undemocratic about the EU
constitution, a constitution drawn up by an unelected commission that
then harangued Europe into accepting it. The implicit, and sometimes
explicit, message was always that "non"-voters were Luddites at best
(to use an Anglo-Saxon metaphor), and probably much worse.
Most nations, like Germany, didn't even bother with a referendum,
merely approving the new treaty in parliament. Their people were left
with a government they didn't ask for, that they weren't consulted
on, and over which they had only limited control.
Contrast this with the United States's own experience in more perfect
union--an elected convention whose final creation was voted on in all
thirteen states, and one which survived initial rejection by several
of them.
There is nothing wrong, nothing immoral, unwise, or inefficient,
about the French people not wishing to cede national sovereignty to
the European center. There is nothing wrong about the French wanting
to be free.
When Europe's leaders meet on June 16, perhaps this time they will
remember that they represent democracies. The new constitution should
express the bottom-up sentiment of a free people, not dictated will
coming from the top down."