Transterrestrial Musings

Defend Free Speech!

Amazon Honor System Click Here to Pay

Site designed by

Powered by
Movable Type 4.0
Biting Commentary about Infinity, and Beyond!

« How Far Will They Go? | Main | A Turnaround? »

You Have A Right To Vote

...but only as long as you vote the right way:

"We're told we can vote no, that the system requires unanimity. But when (a `no' vote) actually happens, every time, the EU tells us: You really only have a right to vote yes," said Dublin travel agent Paul Brady, who voted against the treaty. "You know, I love traveling through Europe, but I don't really want to live there all the time. I'd like to stay as close to America as Europe."

Perhaps the Irish have saved western civilization again. But only until the next attempt to undemocratically foist it on European citizens.


0 TrackBacks

Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: You Have A Right To Vote.

TrackBack URL for this entry:


Habitat Hermit wrote:

God bless the Irish.

The EU is fundamentally undemocratic and that's why this wasn't the first and won't be the last attempt. I would hope most people/Europeans realize by now which means the politicians are due to realize in about oh let's say half a century...

Maybe then Frankenstein's monster will be cut down to size.

Interesting tidbit: over here in Europe most of the anti-EU forces are solidly on the left; one of the few things they've gotten right during my lifetime at least. The party I vote for is still mesmerized and star-struck by the economics, believing it to be closer to their libertarian-conservative ideal and thus unfortunately completely ignoring the bad side of the deal (this applies to a lot of the left as well actually but less so). I do understand the infatuation as the economics of it all are nice or at least better than usual but freedom is more important.

Brock wrote:

Habitat Hermit, speaking as an American, what bugs me about the "economics" arguments for the EU is that most of the benefits of the EU could be duplicated with a few treaties on free movement of labor, goods and capital. You don't need a Constitution for that. We sure as heck didn't need to admit Alberta to the USA to pass NAFTA.

ken anthony wrote:

We don't have imperial ambitions, but they do. The fact that much of America was sold to us rather than won in battle seems to escape their notice. Or as Colin Powell said, "we just want enough ground to bury our solders" that defended THEIR lands.

Sometimes I think it would be better if America did have imperial aspirations. Shut the hell up or we will take your land, oil, whatever. Give the left something real to bitch about.

It just makes me sick. Perhaps I'll just hoist one for the Irish even though I'm not a beer drinking man.

It's too bad we can't just leave this rock and start over. Regardless of how hard it would be, fighting the elements has got to be easier... no whining!

What makes so many aspire to be tyrants? From local politicians to world leaders. They are all the same.

Habitat Hermit wrote:

Brock I agree and disagree with that at the same time. I agree on the premise that it should work that way and it's why I don't have much trouble with EFTA (where Norway is a member).

However EFTA members can be viewed as non-voting EU members* which of course doesn't really protect a nation's self-interest even if the issue is simply economics (but often it isn't). At least not in the way a EU membership would, it's not a level playing field to put it that way. Those who argue for EU membership usually focus on how for example Norway ends up applying, incorporating, and even paying for EU regulations and market access without having a direct say on how those issues are decided etc. and they're not wrong about this part (nor can one really complain about EU members having greater benefits since that's the whole point of it in the first place).

* This is widespread all the way down to the personal level; I've had plenty of experience with being waved through customs as a EU citizen, usually with a wink and a nod and a cheery "you'll soon be" ^_^

Unfortunately EFTA and NAFTA don't really compare unless one imagines a NAFTA where just about all decisions are very strongly influenced almost to the point of being mandated by whatever the US DoC decides on their own. It's not without reason that the EU approach has been described as viral (a very good Wired commentary, not that I agree with how it underplays the non-military impact the US has).

I wouldn't mind the EU or being part of it if the top structure was more democratically elected and inclined and if there was greater national sovereignty for the member states in opting out of particular arrangements and for applying more flexible solutions locally .

Ed Minchau wrote:

"We sure as heck didn't need to admit Alberta to the USA to pass NAFTA."

You know what? Alberta would probably have gone for that deal at the time NAFTA was being negotiated. The province came pretty darn close to separating from Canada before the last federal election.

Josh Reiter wrote:

"I'll just hoist one for the Irish even though I'm not a beer drinking man."

Don't worry I've got you covered. I've hoisted more than a few in my time.

Leave a comment

Note: The comment system is functional, but timing out when returning a response page. If you have submitted a comment, DON'T RESUBMIT IT IF/WHEN IT HANGS UP AND GIVES YOU A "500" PAGE. Simply click your browser "Back" button to the post page, and then refresh to see your comment.

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Rand Simberg published on June 14, 2008 1:30 PM.

How Far Will They Go? was the previous entry in this blog.

A Turnaround? is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

Powered by Movable Type 4.1