France Rejects EU Constitution

[onedomino]

France Rejects EU Treaty, EU into Crisis
Sun May 29, 2005 06:26 PM ET
By Timothy Heritage

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=businessNews&storyID=8636053

PARIS (Reuters) - France overwhelmingly rejected the European Union's constitution in a referendum on Sunday, plunging the EU into crisis and dealing a potentially fatal blow to a charter designed to make the enlarged bloc run smoothly.

EU leaders in Brussels said the constitution was not dead and member states should continue the ratification process, but British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said France's rejection raised profound questions about the future of the bloc.

French President Jacques Chirac swiftly conceded defeat in a televised address to the nation as the "No" camp celebrated a crushing victory with about 56 percent of votes on the EU's first constitution, intended to simplify decision-making.

Such a heavy defeat in a country that has been one of the main pillars of the EU reduces the chances of a repeat vote.

"France has expressed itself democratically. You have rejected the European constitution by a majority. It is your sovereign decision and I take note of it," he said.

"Nevertheless, our ambitions and interests are profoundly linked to Europe. France, a founder member of the union, remains, naturally, within the union.

Many voters wanted mainly to punish the government over France's economy and high unemployment. Chirac, 72, promised a "fresh impetus" for the government, signaling he was ready to dismiss unpopular Prime Minister Jean-Pierre Raffarin.

He ignored calls by some members of the "No" camp to step down but is clearly badly wounded two years before presidential and parliamentary elections.

The euro fell just over half a cent in early trading in Asia to 1.2516/19, down from 1.2573 in New York on Friday, despite already falling in recent weeks partly because of doubts about the fate of the constitution.

Economists said the result could also hit the Turkish lira because it could be seen as a protest against Turkey's efforts to join the EU.

Center-right leader Nicolas Sarkozy demanded policy changes while Finance Minister Thierry Breton promised to accelerate efforts to improve France's economy.

PUNISHING CHIRAC AND THE GOVERNMENT

"The constitution no longer exists," said leading French euroskeptic Philippe de Villiers.

Many voters wanted to punish Chirac and the conservative government over unemployment that is at a 5-year high of 10.2 percent and other economic problems.

Other critics resent what they see as France's declining role in the Union, especially with the expansion to 25 members last year, and say the treaty enshrines economic policies that have failed to stop he loss of jobs to low-wage economies.

Straw declined to say whether London still planned to hold its own referendum next year.

"This raises profound questions for all of us about the future direction of Europe," Straw told reporters. "What we want now is a period of reflection."

"This is a sad, sad day for France, and a sad day for Europe too. But rumors of the constitution's demise have been greatly exaggerated," said Poul Nyrup Rasmussen, former Danish Prime Minister and president of the Party of European Socialists,

"We must not read the "non' in France as a "non' to Europe. This is not the last word on the European constitution."

Luxembourg Prime Minister Jean-Claude Juncker, whose country holds the EU's rotating presidency, told reporters in Brussels that ratification procedures must continue in the 15 member states who have not yet approved the treaty.

He said EU leaders would review the situation at their next regular summit on June 16-17, adding that it would be impossible to renegotiate the treaty.

European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso said the 25-nation EU faced difficulties but would rise to the challenge.

If the constitution does not survive, the EU will continue to operate under its current rules. But the system is widely seen as unworkable for a Union intent on enlarging further, and decision-making could soon become paralyzed.

The constitution was signed by EU leaders last October in Rome after long and tough negotiations and requires the approval of all member states to go into force.

Nine countries have approved the treaty, including Germany which alongside France drove creation of the post-World War II economic alliance that developed into the European Union.

EU officials said before the vote the treaty could be doomed if a large majority of voters in France rejected it and Dutch voters threw it out in a vote on Wednesday. Dutch ministers urged voters on Sunday to ignore the result in France.

Concerns over the constitution's fate have contributed to the euro's recent weakness and economists said before the vote that the currency could fall further in the event of a "No."

-

 

[Annie]

Yep, to my way of thinking, good thing.

See these earlier threads:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/forums/showthread.php?t=21241

http://www.usmessageboard.com/forums/showthread.php?t=21311

 

[onedomino]

FRANCE SAYS 'NO' TO EU CONSTITUTION, PLUNGING EUROPE INTO CRISIS
Received Sunday, 29 May 2005 2000 GMT

http://www.ttc.org/200505292021.j4tklbq10519.htm

PARIS, May 29 (AFP) - French voters massively rejected the EU's first ever constitution Sunday, dealing a rude slap in the face to their governing elite and a potentially fatal setback to the continent's ambitious plans for deeper political union.

In a national referendum, they voted by about 55 percent to 45 to turn down the constitution, according to three exit counts released as polls closed at 10 p.m. (0800 GMT).

The "no" win had been predicted, but the huge margin of the victory deepened a sense of crisis across the EU.

Turn-out was also very high, at between 70 and 8O percent, reflecting the intensity of the national debate.

"This is an ordeal, a real disappointment," said Foreign Minister Michel Barnier, while Defence Minister Michele Alliot-Marie called it "a defeat for France and a defeat for Europe."

Ignoring pleas from President Jacques Chirac that rejection would make France the "black sheep" of the 25-member bloc, the public was instead swayed by fears that the treaty would destroy the country's welfare system, leach new powers to Brussels and shift jobs to low-cost economies of eastern Europe.

The result opened a period of deep uncertainty inside the EU because the constitution needs to be ratified by all members.

By creating the posts of EU president and foreign minister and streamlining the complex process of decision-making, the treaty's 448 articles are intended to build European muscle at a time of intensifying global competition.
So far nine countries have approved the constitution and the rest aim to continue the procedure up to a deadline of October 2006, but it is unclear how the text can survive now that it has been nixed in one of the EU's six founder members and half of the key Franco-German axis.

European leaders fear the French "no" could have a domino effect in other countries planning to hold referendums -- first of all the Netherlands which has a non-binding national vote on Wednesday. Britain has hinted it might scrap a planned referendum if France voted down the constitution.

Sunday's result was a crushing blow to Chirac, who put his authority on the line with three televised appeals for a "yes" vote -- warning that rejection would marginalise France's voice in Europe and do nothing to safeguard its generous social model.

The 72-year-old president -- who marked ten years in office earlier this month -- was expected to ignore calls for his resignation, instead ordering a prompt reshuffle of his government with the dismissal of Prime Minister Jean-Pierre Raffarin.

Hotly-tipped to replace him is Interior Minister Dominique de Villepin, 51, who made his name as the suave spokesman for French opposition to the US war in Iraq.

Other names mentioned are Alliot-Marie and Chirac's arch-rival Nicolas Sarkozy, head of the ruling UMP party.

The rejection marked further evidence of the chronic rift separating the French public from the Paris-based political establishment, nearly all of which -- on left and right -- lined up in support of the constitution.

Chirac's Union for a Popular Movement was joined by the centrist Union for French Democracy (UDF) and the opposition Socialists and Greens in calling for a "yes" vote -- meaning that parties holding 96 percent of seats in the National Assembly were disavowed by the public Sunday.

The "no" vote was urged by a disparate array of forces, including the far-right of Jean-Marie Le Pen, nationalist Eurosceptics, Communists and Trotskyists, dissident Socialists under former prime minister Laurent Fabius, and anti-globalisation groups.

Two months of campaigning triggered one of the most passionate political debates of recent years, with both sides sensing that the referendum was a moment to define France's future course. Families and friends were polarised as the country split down the middle between pros and antis.

While supporters argued that the constitution was a necessary next step towards France's destiny as the leader of a united Europe, rejectionists said it was a charter for unbridled capitalism and would entrench US-style "liberal" economics at the heart of the EU.

Many ordinary voters caught the message that the constitution would open up France to cheap competition from eastern Europe and lead to "dumping" as norms of social protection are dragged downwards.

Some saw a "no" vote as a way of blocking Turkish entry to the EU, even though the issue is not in the text.

Despite Chirac's urging in a televised appeal on Thursday "not to answer the wrong question," it is also clear that many voters used the referendum to punish his government -- which they blame for 10.2 percent unemployment, falling real wages and the crisis of confidence in the country's future.

-

 

[Annie]

and from one of the Chicagoboyz, (U of C alumni or prof):

http://www.chicagoboyz.net/archives/003208.html

May 29, 2005
The Bicycle Tips Over
As predicted, the French rejected the EU Constitution. Early reports say it was a whopping 57.26 percent voting "non".

Bravo to every Jacques and Jeannette who jammed a finger in the eye of the enarques and the whole rest of the out-of-touch elite in France. This is almost as good as the purple fingers in Iraq. It is a step in the right direction.

Valery Giscard d'Estaing, who wrote the thing, said countries that reject the treaty will be "asked to vote again". Maybe he should be asked to take advantage of this opportunity to remain silent. How about, no means no, Valery? How about a Plan B? How about something different for Europe than a gray, lifeless, undemocratic, unaccountable bureaucracy lodged in Brussels sucking what life remains out of the old continent? How about a "Europe of fatherlands", as De Gaulle wanted? How about not pretending that Denmark and Portugal and Malta and Italy are all really part of one country when they aren't? How about a plan that will accommodate reality? Back to the drawing board, I hope.

The fact that anti-Americanism drove much of the vote doesn’t bother me at all. I don't want people to like us nearly as much as I want them to be able to govern themselves the way they see fit, have real elections with real consequences, and get the benefits and bear the consequences of those decisions. If the French don't want capitalisme sauvage or anglo-saxonisme or hyper-liberalisme, OK by me. They are free to have as much socialism as they can get away with. It's their country. And with this vote it will stay their country for a while longer. Good.

On to Holland.


Posted by Lexington Green on May 29, 2005 04:26 PM

 

[Annie]

I think you are of the 'elite' but no matter, give me your perspective on this NYT article, is it hyperbole?

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/29/i...&en=013cb5d9cd57930d&ei=5094&partner=homepage

May 29, 2005
French Voters Deliver a Crushing Defeat to European Constitution
By KATRIN BENNHOLD
International Herald Tribune
PARIS, May 29 - French voters dealt a crushing defeat to the European constitution today, demonstrating their determination to punish the leaders of France and of Europe after a bitter campaign that split the country in two.

As the polls closed, the French Interior Ministry said the no camp had 57.26 percent, compared to 42.74 for yes, with nearly 83 percent of the votes counted.

The result was a shock for President Jacques Chirac and a large part of the political establishment that had campaigned for a yes vote as necessary for strengthening European unity.

It also created a challenge for the European Union, which has staked its future on the constitution.

Mr. Chirac addressed the nation 30 minutes after the result was announced. "My dear compatriots," Mr. Chirac said, "France has spoken democratically. A majority of you have rejected the constitution. This is your sovereign decision."

But he added, "France's decision inevitably creates a difficult context for defending our interests in Europe."

He indicated he would reshuffle his government in the next few days.

In the no camp, politicians were positively gleeful.

"There is no more constitution," said Philippe de Villiers, a far-right politician who campaigned strenuously for a no vote. He said the vote had "exceptional legitimacy" because of the high turnout and said Mr. Chirac, who faces "a major political crisis," should dissolve Parliament and call new elections.

Jean-Marie Le Pen, leader of the far-right National Front, said Mr. Chirac should resign.

Turnout was estimated at over 70 percent, far exceeding other recent elections in France. The final figure was expected to surpass turnout in the referendum on the Maastricht Treaty 13 years ago that paved the way to the euro.

"It's a big no," said Bruno Jeanbart, director of political research at the CSA polling station. "It's a twin protest vote against the government and against Europe."

Three days ahead of a similar referendum in the Netherlands, analysts said, the French result was likely to increase the chances of a firm rejection there.

In France today, the mood was tense as the country's 42 million voters turned out heavily to vote yes or no to the charter.

The constitution can take effect only if it is ratified by all 25 member states. Nine countries had ratified it before the French went to the polls, and France was the first in the European Union to decide via a binding referendum.

The no vote makes France, a founding member of the European Union, the first country to reject the charter. It also sets back European integration by blocking a treaty that aims to streamline decision-making in an expanded union.

This morning, anti-constitution demonstrators prevented Prime Minister Jean-Pierre Raffarin from voting in his home region of Poitou-Charentes as planned. He managed to cast his ballot a few hours later.

In the evening, the Paris police were on alert as the yes and no camps prepared to hold rallies in the city center.

In the last three months, the debate over the constitution crept into all spheres of French life, from prime-time television to school curricula to heated discussions in cafés and bars.

Every voter received a copy of the proposed constitution in the mail, and polls suggest that 80 percent either read it or discussed it with friends...Lots more!

 

[Annie]

http://www.belgraviadispatch.com/archives/004590.html

May 29, 2005
C'est Non!
A rather resounding non. In transit airport blogging, but commenters are invited to ponder the ramifications of this "stinging repudiation." I mean, what next?

UPDATE (flight delayed): More from Le Figaro:

Le non historique du 29 mai

...selon les première estimations, près de 55% d'entre eux ont dit non au Traité constitutionnel européen lors de ce référendum qui a largement mobilisé les Français. Le chiffre de participation atteint des records à près de 70%, largement plus que pour le précédent référendum européen sur le Traité de Maastricht. Ce non massif résonne comme un coup de tonnerre au-dessus du paysage politique français, dont les principaux courants s'étaient engagés pour le oui.
Translation (a hasty one!): According to the first estimates, close to 55% of [French voters] said no to the European constitutional treaty during a referendum that largely mobilized the French public. Voter participation reached records approaching 70%, significantly higher than the previous referendum on the Treaty of Maastricht. This massive no resonates lack a thunderclap across the French political landscape....[emphasis added]

It sure does. And it's certainly not a great day for Jacques Chirac, is it? One might say that he's now completely damaged goods. Pity. Meantime, let's now keep an even closer eye on Sarkozy as '07 looms. Truth be told, it's silly and sophomoric to emptily cheer-lead this historical repudiation of the EU constitution solely because it's such tremendously poor news for Jacques. This story, after all, is much bigger than him, and the ramifications of the "non" vote are not necessarily all positive from a U.S. perspective (much of the opposition to the treaty was from gauchiste free market skeptics; or rightist bigots like Le Pen). What is quite clear, however, is that this referendum is a massive setback to the prospects of a cohesive Euro-zone taking form in the near term (Henry Kissinger would have been able to call a single European Foreign Minister per the rejected Consitution!). Is it a death knell? Oh, who knows? There will doubtless be yet another referendum a few years hence on the issue. Giscard d'Estaing, for instance, is already on the record stating there will have to be a re-vote going forward. But this is a tremendous setback indeed to the entire process of European integration, of course, and it also showcases a massive failure of leadership by the Chirac Administration. They simply were not able to convince their country on the merits of their vision of Europe's future. And carping on about "multipolarity" and the big, bad Anglo-Saxon meanies didn't do the trick, it seems. Tant pis.


Posted by Gregory at May 29, 2005 09:23 PM

 

[Annie]

You and I may disagree that it's a good thing, but it's happening. Note the first headlines, catch this:

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050530/ap_on_re_eu/france_eu_referendum

French Voters Reject First EU Constitution

Obviously more to come...

 

[nosarcasm]

now the quetion is why do you want the EU to fail ?

Worried ?

 

[Annie]

http://www.belgraviadispatch.com/archives/004588.html

The standard reason we often hear that the European project is endangered (of which the Constitution is such a critical part) is that it is viewed as a pet project of the political elites, seeking to impose a supranational Brussels Eurocracy, issuing diktats willy-nilly to the skeptical masses who, on the Left, are suspicious Thatcherite liberalism will be shoved down their collective throats, and on the Right, are concerned that ancient repositories of national gloire and patrimoine risk bespoilment amidst all the worrisome supra-national centralization. There is some of all this, to be sure. And relatedly, but in more general vein, it is worth seeing how Anatole Kaletsky puts it a bit differently in The Times (London):

What people are voting against is not just one or other particular clause of the constitution, nor even its general tenor, whether this is too liberal or insufficiently so. The real bugbear is the idea of any unified constitution that attempts to impose a single system of government on the whole of Europe and purports to harmonise away the political philosophies, economic preferences and social traditions developed in different nations over hundreds of years.

But if Giscard d'Estaing is right, and the reason the Yes camp is having such a hard go of it is the unpopularity of the current government, what more does that tell us about why the EU Constitution might bite the dust on Sunday in France? Well, in large part, it's the economy stupid, per Anatole Kaletsky:

The people of France, Germany, Italy and the Netherlands may be angry about globalisation or ultra-liberalism or immigration, but this reflects a deeper malaise. Their living standards are falling, their pensions are in danger, their children are jobless and their national pride is turning into embarrassment and even shame. In sum, they feel that their countries, which numbered among the world’s richest and most powerful nations as recently as the middle of the last decade, have gone to the dogs under the leadership of the present generation of politicians. And, at least in the economic sense, they are absolutely right.

The relative economic decline of “old” Europe since the early 1990s — especially of Germany and Italy, but also of the Netherlands and France — has been a disaster almost unparalleled in modern history. While Britain and Japan certainly suffered some massive economic dislocations, in the early 1980s and the mid-1990s respectively, they never experienced the same sort of permanent transformation from thriving full-employment economies to stagnant societies where mass unemployment and falling living standards are accepted as permanent facts of life. In Britain, unemployment more than doubled from 1980 to 1984, but conditions then quickly improved. By the late 1980s it was enjoying a boom, the economy was growing by 4 per cent and unemployment had halved. In continental Europe, by contrast, unemployment has been stuck between 8 and 11 per cent since 1991 and growth has reached 3 per cent only once in those 14 years.

This dreadful economic performance is more than enough to explain the political angst among Europeans. But what does it mean for the future of Europe? If Europe’s economy remains paralysed, then the federalist project is clearly dead, as are all hopes of further significant EU enlargement. But if the economy recovered, the disillusionment with EU politics might quickly vanish.

Incidentally, Kaletsky thinks the only way to resuscitate the European project is to devalue the Euro and lower interest rates to so as to jump-start real, sustainable economic growth through the big, motor economies of Euro-Land. But I'll leave that issue for another time and focus instead on a post-mortem (hopefully not an embarrasingly premature one!) of the likely No vote Sunday. Like so often in history, I suspect the reason the EU constitution will be voted down in France on Sunday is due to multiple variables, a confluence of factors--not necessarily one dominant monocausal narrative.

To recap, then: the Left views EU-Land as an Anglo-Saxon encroachment on their cherished (and embarrasingly scelerotic) social welfare state. The nostalgic Right misses things like de Gaulle's timarchic evocations of France's force de frappe and wonders worriedly about what servility to the Bruxellian yoke would mean. Yes, of course, the economy looms large too. It has been stagnant for years, and chronic unemployment rankles, humiliates, angers even. There are also the problems associated with integrating immigrants from North Africa and points beyond. Such efforts at integration have gotten trickier of late, as violent events in iconic havens of libertinism like Amsterdam have showcased. It's not far-fetched in the least to see more nativist backlash taking root in the years ahead. This too will likely have unfortunate economic ramifications. And, lest we forget, there is d'Estaing's point about the No's gaining strength because the vote is basically a plebescite on Chirac's government. No surprise, that. Chirac has increasingly become a discredited figure, peddling a transparently cheap version of neo-Gaullism (along with his old cohort Dominique de Villepin proferring whimsical, Boucherian-like dandyism, mixed with doses of theatrical neo-Napoleonic grandeur--meant to be taken seriously so as to pass for a real foreign policy). Corruption charges persistently nip at and dog Chirac too, of course. And much like another discredited figure, Gerhard Schroder, Chirac resorted to a paltry anti-Americanism (so soon after the death of 3,000 from that country in the largest terrorist attack in history); mostly because he had little but this diversion to peddle to his disillusioned public so as to distract them from a moribund economy, their manifold doubts about centralization of power in Brussels, their immigration fears, the specter of a political life in growing decay with charisma-less mediocrities like Lionel Jospin on the Left and too charismatic neo-fascists like Le Pen on the Right. (Worth noting, despite all the negativity, leaders like Tony Blair who took the harder road still end up, ultimately, being rewarded by their publics. People smell out character and conviction; just as they smell out opportunists and cads).

So here we are. We might say it has been an ugly few years for France, set to get worse as the discord and recriminations and confusion stemming from a referendum defeat on Sunday looms so large. I can't say I'm surprised, truth be told. More and more, I think of France more as a country to visit simply to enjoy the great wines (yes, they are better than their Californian cousins), the surf of Biarritz, the sunny decadence of the Riviera, the "elegant third world" (Baudrillard's memorable description of how Los Angelenos view old European cities like Paris) of that most beautiful of capitals, the Grand Marnier soufles, a good drink at the old Ritz bar off Place Vendome. But I don't look at her as a real leader now or in the forseeable future. Intellectually, militarily, culturally, or otherwise. C'est triste, non? Do I have any hope for the future? Yes, Nicolas Sarkozy assuming the Presidency and instituting some form of 'shock therapy' along the lines Kaltesky suggests. But we're not there yet. And would the French people even be bold enough to go along with such an ambitious project? Or will they instead continue to languish amidst the quaint comforts of their perennial labor strikes, their risible 35 hour weeks (that's less than half a typical week in large swaths of Manhattan, friends!), their bloated pension system? Developing, as they say. And pour le pire, at least in the short term, alas.

Posted by Gregory at May 27, 2005 03:52 AM

 

[Annie]

now the quetion is why do you want the EU to fail ?

Worried ?

Directed to whom?

 

[Annie]

I guess like this:

http://www.samizdata.net/blog/archives/007601.html

Wrong reasons, right result
David Carr (London) European Union • French affairs
(2)
To all French crypto-communists, syndicalists, marxists, trotskyites, leninists, stalinists, national socialists, socialist nationalists, primitivists, Trade Union dinosaurs, student activists, greenie nutters, neo-fascists, old fashioned fascists, quasi-crypto-troglodyte-Pol-Pottist-year
zero-flat-earthers, looney tunes and enviro-goons....Merci Beaucoup!!!!

I could kiss every single one of you (but I don't know how to say that in French).

 

[5stringJeff]

Wow! Talk about a slap in the face on Chirac!

 

[theim]

now the quetion is why do you want the EU to fail ?

Worried ?

I don't really care about the EU. A big socialist European bloc will fare no better than a lot of small socialist European nations. I havn't paid much attention to this Constitution issue, though it is nice to see the Euros have a bit of sense left, and aren't just wiling to scede their sovereignty to an unelected politburo in Brussels.

 

[onedomino]

Those reveling in the defeat of the EU Constitutional referendum in France should enjoy themselves while they can. The integration of Europe is not a question of if, but when. Apparently, not too soon. But it will ultimately occur. Frankly, the coalition of French extremists, from both sides of the political spectrum, that voted against the EU Treaty gives me the creeps: racists and xenophobes on the right, socialists and communists on the left. Many French voted against the EU Constitution because they are afraid that they will lose the guaranteed benefits of their social welfare state. It is precisely this social welfare state that has most contributed to making the French economically uncompetitive. The EU Constitution was criticized because it was seen as too Anglo-Saxon and too permissive of American style market driven economics. But it is the competition of market driven economics that succeeds, while socialism fails. The French who voted “non” can howl at the moon for as long as they like, but that will not change the fact that globalization is an inexorable process. Sooner or later, the French will have to tell themselves the truth, and learn how to compete in a Capitalist market driven world. Otherwise, the French economy will continue to sink as the world passes it by. Certainly the 448 articles of the bloated 300 page EU Constitution were ridiculous. The Euro elitists who wrote and negotiated the proposed constitution were out of touch with ordinary folk. They should have written a short, sweet, understandable, homage to individual human rights, such as the American Constitution. Instead they conjured up a legalistic mash that only a lawyer could love. America will not soon be challenged by the EU. We can concentrate on the competition with China.

 

[padisha emperor]

Wow! Talk about a slap in the face on Chirac!

explanation of one of the reason of the NON victory : a lot of people voted not on the text, for or against the EU Constitution, they voted against the government. OR against the interior situation.

the NON partisans, like De Villiers, Le Pen, did a "fear campaign", they said that it would be awful if the YES would win. the extrem left said that it was an ultra liberal constitution (in France the word liberal is for the economical sense ).
Sadly, it was wrong : no chaos with this constitution. It would have been far better. And not ultra liberal.

but they play on the fear of the population. And they won.
Before the campaing, I didn't like M-G Buffet and Olivier Besancenot (communists) and Philippe de Villiers, and I hated JM Le Pen.

Now, I hate them.
They use a so important poll only for their own ass.
Laurent Fabius, number 2 of the socialist party, was for the NON only for its own carrier.

When i see people happy of the victory of the NON...and they said : it's the NON against the liberalism, and it's god for the social point, the democratic point in the EU....I'm so sad....Because the people who voted NON : all the things they rejected, they will see them all the same, with the treaty of Nice....but they lost all the positives things of the constitution....


really bright, gentlemen,...

 

[nosarcasm]

I guess like this:

http://www.samizdata.net/blog/archives/007601.html

Yep, I would have rejected the constitution (if they dared to present
it to German voters) it is not because I am against the idea to coordinate
the affairs of Europe more closely, I reject the bureaucratic state of
affairs and lack of democracy.

Still I dont cheer for the rejection now because most people that rejected it were leftist anti captial looneys and our local racists. Not the crowd I usually
hang out with.

I was baffled that alot of Americans cheered on the reaction because
they view Europe as an enemy. This kind of attitude is counterproductive.

 

[Comrade]

Yep, I would have rejected the constitution (if they dared to present
it to German voters) it is not because I am against the idea to coordinate
the affairs of Europe more closely, I reject the bureaucratic state of
affairs and lack of democracy.

Still I dont cheer for the rejection now because most people that rejected it were leftist anti captial looneys and our local racists. Not the crowd I usually
hang out with.

I was baffled that alot of Americans cheered on the reaction because
they view Europe as an enemy. This kind of attitude is counterproductive.

This coming from a citizen of a country which elected their prime minister based on an Anti-American platform due to Bush's 'war on terror'. I'll take advice from a German the moment they start putting their pocketbook where their mealy mouths are, and kick out the American bases still funding a primary portion of their economy where such bases exist. It's one thing to say you are against the war on Iraq, but if you continue to let these hospitals and airbases exist in your country, it really means you're just a bunch of hippocrits. Pick a side, already.

 

[onedomino]

Yep, I would have rejected the constitution (if they dared to present it to German voters) it is not because I am against the idea to coordinate the affairs of Europe more closely, I reject the bureaucratic state of affairs and lack of democracy.

Still I don’t cheer for the rejection now because most people that rejected it were leftist anti captial looneys and our local racists. Not the crowd I usually hang out with.

I was baffled that alot of Americans cheered on the reaction because they view Europe as an enemy. This kind of attitude is counterproductive.

Some states, especially Germany, did not even get the opportunity to vote in an EU Constitution referendum. That is an outrage. Yet the docile German people have allowed the socialist government to rip-off their direct consent voting rights. And as far as it has been reported in the press, have not said a word in protest. The French Government at least offered its people the chance to vote in a binding referendum. Other states, such as Netherlands, only offer a non-binding referendum. The democracy-be-damned Dutch President has said that unless the no vote reaches 60 percent, he intends to pursue the formal Netherlands ratification of the treaty. That is over-the-top elitism and a disgusting disavowal of democracy. It is the same elitist attitude that the framers of the EU Constitution used to construct the out-of-touch 448 article document.

Nosarcasm, no one considers you to be an enemy, but I am not sure why you would be “baffled” that many Americans view Europe as the enemy. The two main players on the continent are France and Germany. And in their national elections the winning political parties of both countries stoked the fires of anti-Americanism in order to improve their chances at the polls. Americans will take a long time to forget that. Moreover, Americans remember spending hundreds of billions of dollars across fifty years to protect France and Germany from Soviet aggression and communism. Yet when America asked these countries for UN support for its policy to remove a mass murderer in Iraq, both France and Germany actively worked to preserve the despot. Americans will take a long time to forget that.

 

[no1tovote4]

Jacques Chirac made no bones about the fact that he proposed the EU and wanted to be strong in the leadership to insure that Europe became a "counterbalance" to the US. In order to thwart the US on every issue without regard to the principal of the stance. Then people in Europe wonder why we might consider them enemies?

 

[nosarcasm]

Just because Chirac and Schroeder have their own powerplans does
not make them enemies. They played to their domestic audience
that once piece at all costs. Foolish but democratic.

But if you use the term enemies, a term they did not use for the US
you create a self fulfilling prophecy. Well I like both places so its not
my interest that it goes down that route.

Not to mention I assume in September in Germany the pro US Angela
Merkel will become the first female chancellor in Germany.

So for now I ll hate the haters