pai mei

I am from Romania, we joined the EU this year, and I regret it.
We will receive orders and laws from the EU and we will obey them, because "nothing wrong can come from EU"
In our Constitution it says : "independent and self governed country", from where then do all these rules that nobody asked me if I like them or not, appear ? My influence on these laws from outside is almost nothing.
Where is the democracy , and the people that govern themselves ?

Good things from the EU - the freedom to travel and work everywhere in Europe. If indeed the people of Europe are friends and the European Union is their creation and their will, then the EU should stop at that, nothing more.

The EU constitution did not pass the vote of the people, it did not pass in the Netherlands and it did not pass in France.
But our "beloved leaders" found a way around our will : they named it a "treaty" not a "constitution"

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/08ad3c74-1cb...b5df10621.html



A former russian who opposed communism compares the European Union with the Soviet Union :

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles...ctatorship.htm

hagatha

I would argue that under the former Soviet Regime personal freedom was restricted, like travel, religion and the ability to own personal property. Hence the prevalence of the black market. Also, the existence of gulags, can't say enough about that one. This doesn't exist under the EU.

Yes there will be growing pains, especially in a country that is extremely poor and not used to a democratic system.

Romania also benefits from being a part of a system of currency, the euro, used throughout Europe that has value, unlike the Soviet currency which had absolutely no value beyond its own borders.

__________________
Thats the last time I trust the strangest people I ever met....H. Simpson

tecoyah

Anytime you attempt to integrate a diverse population together, there will be forced compromise to attain some level of uniformity. By creating a "Middle Ground" in which the population can meet, the level of acceptability is increased for all involved on a larger scale. No matter what agreement is reached, there will be disenfranchised individuals if favor of a more encompassing whole...like it or not it is reality.
Eventually an equilibrium should be reached, coupled with the hoped for integration of populations leading to a shared feeling of ownership in the process of governing. Regardless of the outcome of Europes great experiment in unification, in its infancy the Idea will be far from perfect and many will feel the growing pains. Added to this are cultural barriers inherent in the Human race which will create endless stumbling blocks along the way.

I personally hope the plan works....might be good for everyone.

Strange Famous

Well, Russia is certainly going back to old style communism under Putin. I guess people feel that it is better to have bread than freedom, when they are hungry. Or perhaps simply that an autocratic government is better than a nation run by gangsters and oligarchs.

__________________
"Do not tell lies, and do not do what you hate,
for all things are plain in the sight of Heaven. For nothing
hidden will not become manifest, and nothing covered will remain
without being uncovered."

The Gospel of Thomas

joshbaumgartner

The EU is flat out a good thing for Europe from a strategic perspective. I mean where would the people in the US be if they were 50 independent countries only loosly confederated? I'm sure some romanticists would appreciate the notion, but realistically, we certainly wouldn't be the preeminent world power we are, that is for certain.

That said...

The people are the ones that get to choose this. If Danes or Irish or Swiss or Romanians vote against being part of it, that's their choice. I don't care if it is good or bad for them strategically, that's their matter to figure out. I think they are dumb for not trying to make the EU work, but I don't live there so I don't have a vote in it. No council or other body, or even me, should be able to override the vote of the people.

For those who live in countries where their leaders are shoe-horning them into the EU over the people's protests:

Stop bitching about the EU and start bitching about your own leaders. Of course the EU is going to take any opening it can to get your country to join, they think they are right and that its best for you, but that's neither here nor there. What you should do is take any leader in your country who doesn't listen to the people and drag them out of office as quick as you can get your hands on the slimy bastards. If you have leaders with backbone, and the vote is against the EU, it doesn't matter what the EU tries, they'll be helpless to change matters. If you let leaders stay in power who for whatever reason side with the EU over the people, then frankly you are going to get the EU like it or not.

If you really think your country deserves to remain sovereign, then the first mark of a true sovereign state is a leadership that doesn't let any other country or organization push it around. If you can't put such leadership at the head of your country, than as harsh as it sounds, your country is going to get treated like a less-than-sovereign state.

mirevolver

Simply being a member of the EU does not mean that your country uses the Euro as currency. Of the 27 EU states, only 13 actually use the Euro as currency. There are very strict economic criteria that must be met and sustained before a country can use the Euro. Poorer countries like Romania, Bulgaria, or Estonia do not benefit from the single currency system. And even Greece, one of the original 15 EU nations, only just barely met the criteria for the Euro, and Greece has also been accused by Germany and France of altering their figures to meet that criteria. Britain, Denmark and Sweden are eligible for the Euro, but refuse to adopt it and have instead remained with their own currencies.

The EU from it's very beginning as the EEC was never intended to stop at being just a free trade zone between European countries. To quote Churchill in a speech he gave in Zurich after WWII, "We must now build a kind of United States of Europe...the first step must be a partnersfip between France and Germany...France and Germany must take the lead together." (Source: The European Union: A Very Short Introduction by John Pinder) From the very beginning the EU was intended to be a 'United States of Europe,' and for that to happen, the countries that join would be required to give up some of their sovereignty. This seems to be a major sticking point among the citizens of all countries in the EU, to the point that in France and the Netherlands, where the vote for the constitution went to the people, it failed. Interestingly the leaders of the EU nations seem to think differently than the people which is why the constitution vote passed in Germany where the people were not allowed to vote on it and it instead was voted on by the German houses of Congress (the Bundestag and the Bundesrat).

One thing I clearly agree with the OP is the mention of the European Commission. A 25 member commission, not elected and not held accountable by the citizens of the EU, which acts as the initiating body of new laws and as the watchdog and enforcer of the laws. A law initiated by the commission can only be changed if the European council unanimously agrees to make the change. And a member of the commission can only be removed if there is a collective agreement by the commission to remove that member. Who watches the watchmen? It seems only the watchmen can watch the watchmen. If I were a citizen of the EU that would scare me.

__________________
Aside from my great plans to become the future dictator of the moon, I have little interest in political discussions.

pai mei

joshbaumgartner all the politicians in my country are pro EU, and almost all the people too, I am a minority with my view.
What I would like to see in the world is total descentralization, every village,and every street in a country doing what they want, and have their own elected "governemnt" made from people in the area - very easy to know them and reach them, just the same constitution and fundamental rights for all
I am against rules coming from 2000 kilometres and from people I never known.
States are good for ensuring people some basic rights, and that is all, no centralised government needed
It would be very easy to manage these mini states - the size of a village or a street, and protect the environment - because if you cut down your little forest you don't have another one

aKula

I disagree. Co-opertation in a larger entity leads to greater efficiencies and the possibility of greater strategic decisions that will pay off in the long run.

For example organising things such as major roads, railways and irrigation. You need a centralised system to be able to coordinate such projects. This infrastructure leads to economic growth and better living conditions for the people (compare pre-industrlisation Europe to today).

This is of course not only limited to infrastructure. Healthcare systems, financial regulation and defense are some other areas that benifit from centralised control.

Then you have the private sector on top of that. The major banks and heavy industry for example. The country needs certain chemicals for agricultural and industrial purpouses. Large scale production of such products is only really possible with entities that reach outside the frame of the village or street.

Of course other things can be handled better by the lower levels of government.

__________________
"I am the wrath of God. The earth I pass will see me and tremble." -Klaus Kinski as Don Lope de Aguirre

xepherys

On the contrary. Here I sit on a US government installation in Afghanistan where, though there is a central government, most people do not abide by it. Each region is 'managed' loosely by clans and families. Each town is looked over by the local elders. Due to this absolute lack of central influence, there is virtually no infrastructure. The police that have been installed, more or less, by the US forces acts only vaguely as peacekeepers, as there aren't really any local 'laws' to uphold. Since taxes are not collected at really any level, the government has difficulty funding projects to provide modern needs, such as an electrical grid or clean water distribution. Again, since the government lacks funds, there is little draw for businesses to come to Afghanistan, keeping the economy impoverished.

I'm not sure I see a society without centralized government really prevailing in modern times. It's just not human nature to work together on a grand enough scale without someone overseeing it.

__________________
The prospect of achieving a peace agreement with the extremist group of MILF is almost impossible...
-- Emmanuel Pinol, Governor of Cotobato

My Homepage

Willravel

Wait until we start hearing about the already formed North American Union and the soon to be Asian Union and African Union.

Pai Mei, what would be important now would be self sufficiency. Develop the means to exist independently if need be and, while you work with the other EU countries for common goals, to remain an independent nation so far as all necessary resources: clean water, energy, food, housing, etc. If you can manage to do that, then the control from the EU will ultimately be negligible. Have a strong defensive military, and a weak offensive military.

I realize you're not the Prime Minister (yet!), you can always be an active member of your community. The ministry of foreign affairs is always looking to hire bright people, anyway.

One thing you should realize that while the EU is more socialist than, say, the US, they are not communist by nature. It would take some time for a transition from the way things are now to what they were under Lenin.


Do you have a Dracula accent? That'd be awesome.

seretogis

That depends on what your definition of "prevailing" is.

__________________
seretogis - sieg heil
perfect little dream the kind that hurts the most, forgot how it feels well almost
no one to blame always the same, open my eyes wake up in flames

guyy

Really? The Americans have used their bases in Poland and elsewhere in Fair Europe as part of their international network of secret prisons/torture stations. It may be that the EU as a whole or the individual states involved can't do much about what happens inside American bases, but all the same, it's clear that Europe is one link in the global gulag.

xepherys

seretogis, I think I defined "prevailing" in the first paragraph. Infrastructure is by far the largest part of that. Having a voice in international affairs would also be included. Sorry, a small standalone country has little voice, but as part of the EU, that voice is at least a little stronger. Look at the United States. Rhode Island, itself, doesn't really have a voice in international affairs. But as part of the electing body (as all states are) for state and federal officials, they then garner additional weight (albeit small... Rhode Island is rather tiny).

__________________
The prospect of achieving a peace agreement with the extremist group of MILF is almost impossible...
-- Emmanuel Pinol, Governor of Cotobato

My Homepage