Thoughts about the European Union.

[The Gaffer]

Originally Posted by jerseydevil

That is why you come up with these sarcastic remarks - such as "yawn" because you really don't have respect for others. And that just shows it.

But oh well - maybe one day you will actually understand American history and the founding of this country - but I doubt it - because it isn't really that much of an interest to you. I at least try to see what the other point of view is - whether I agree with it or not.

And I have studied a lot of European History - as well as American history. I continue to look at what is going on with the EU to better my understanding of it. But with my expience of American History and European History and the development of the EU - I really do not see any difference between what we did and what the EU is doing. I think it's more of an ego thing for europeans to think they are doing something new. As well as a lack of understanding of the US and the relationship with the states.

No, the reason I wrote that is because it's really boring how, every time there's a constructive discussion going on, along you come and turn it into a slagging match. You come across as an arrogant, small minded individual who lacks imagination and insight and I pity you.

[Last Child of Ungoliant]

meep

[jerseydevil]

Originally Posted by The Gaffer

No, the reason I wrote that is because it's really boring how, every time there's a constructive discussion going on, along you come and turn it into a slagging match. You come across as an arrogant, small minded individual who lacks imagination and insight and I pity you.

How little you know me. But I don't need your pity nor do I want it - so you can right to...

Of course I should add - that of course being the superior person you are - you never come across as arrogant nor do you ever attack.

Give me a break Gaffer and get off your damn high horse.

[Elvellon]

My position regarding your behaviour is clear enough in what I posted before. Any more would be almost redundant.
I will make clear, however, several points:

The claiming the US states are just names is yours. I have claimed they are not sovereign sates. That is not the same thing.

I joked, using Irony about a situation, (and the irony went both ways for US and EU); and, as you like to say, that isn’t sarcasm. And I did it in the same spirit I read in posts of yours like this in this very thread:

Originally Posted by jerseydevil

Sorry - sometimes the truth hurts and Belgium has been acting like the lapdog of France and Germany. Not so much now - but definely last year. I haven't seen much of Belgium on French news much - now they seem to have been pushed aside in favor of Spain for the time being (but the two good ole buddies who want to rule the EU are still hand in hand).

If you can use it to call a lap dog to a country in a joking manner I can use just an absurd one. Or am I wrong and you were actually trying to be rude at that point?



If I had used sarcasm, I would have been infinitely more caustic that call you American, I would cut the smilleys, I would not clarify that I found the sovereign state in the case of the US to be the US itself, (and not the component states), and would not bother to deliberately clarify I think the EU states have a similar “problem” of not being true sovereign states, as with that "problem" of individual US states. I placed it, you know, in the post of mine you quoted, most of it in the part you choose not to use the bold on.


Further concerning arrogance. It is not arrogance if I choose not to accept your desire of recognition of NJ as a sovereign state. Your position regarding this issue is not a Law written in stone that have an undeniable validity by itself; it is just a debatable opinion.
The choice of the exact interpretation of a juridical notion, used by the entire International community, is not subject to personal desires, (or even to the particular desires of a particular state, whatever that state may be). There are several criteria that can be used as to ascertain the validity of a choice, but, in this regard, it is irrelevant if I “want” a state to be sovereign or not. Being it New Jersey, Portugal or whatever. Personal desire or inclination is not, nor ever were, a valid argument, for me, to chose a notion. Logic and coherence are.
Further, I have maintained a position, and I have been consistent with it, for both US, and UE; there is no arrogant duplicity of standards.
I have further admitted, when I stated my choice of definition of sovereign state, that it was debatable, not gospel truth.

To surmise, your attempt at shifting the blame regarding arrogance doesn’t work.


Regarding the Notion of Sovereign State.
.
For clarification, I use the notion, as supplied by the International Court of Justice that can be found in, (if I’m not mistaken), an advisory opinion regarding reparations for losses suffered when at the service of the UN. The reasons why I choose to accept this particular definition are simple:

First. The fact that that notion is used, by jurists, and is widely accepted as the most correct interpretation by many of them. That the interpretation has an international acceptance is of relevance in a subject that is relevant for the international community.

Second. It makes sense to me. There is a factual difference in autonomy between a confederate or federate state and one that is fully autonomous, whatever that state may be and whenever it may be. It is important that a notion can clarify that difference, and this one can.
I will further clarify:

The Sovereign state has the totality of rights and duties, this does not invalidate that others, (like semi-sovereign states and associations of states), may have part of them. some of your examples are good cases of this partial applicability.
Plus, the EU is a good example of this, it is not a sovereign state, lacking some of the rights of a true sovereign state, but does enjoy some but not all the rights of a true sovereign state. (It does not have, for instance, the right to wage war).

[jerseydevil]

Originally Posted by Elvellon

My position regarding your behaviour is clear enough in what I posted before. Any more would be almost redundant.

And my opinion of your behavior is abundantly clear. So - enough said.

[Last Child of Ungoliant]

but does have the right to make economic decisions




meep

[Nurvingiel]

Who has the right?

*hides with Chrys*

[jerseydevil]

Originally Posted by Last Child of Ungoliant

but does have the right to make economic decisions

The Eu will be able to wage war if the new proposal goes through to set up the European military that will be under the EU flag. Already - the EU does have a five state joint military branch - which does take on military operations around the world.

So the EU is not just economic - and the plan is not to keep it just economic.

[Earniel]

This weekend the European Union celebrates its 50th birthday. 'thought this was a nice thing to bump this thread.

[Valandil]

Eeewwww...

We let those guys get away with saying things like that to each other!?

[sisterandcousinandaunt]

That's some nasty excuse for debate.

Earniel, maybe a nice EU post to the Happy Birthday Thread would have been more.....festive.

[brownjenkins]

Originally Posted by Eärniel

This weekend the European Union celebrates its 50th birthday. 'thought this was a nice thing to bump this thread.

Isn't that kind of stretching it? The real union formed in the mid-90s I thought.

Of course, the US took a good 100 years to settle down as well, so the 1776 thing is a bit of a crock too.

[Earniel]

Originally Posted by brownjenkins

Isn't that kind of stretching it? The real union formed in the mid-90s I thought.

Hm, maybe. Personally I would have thought they'd take 1951 with the ECSC and the Treaty of Paris as 'birth'. Since that actually was the first form of cooperation, but then only really for steel and coals. So apparently they prefer to reckon by the Treaty of Rome in 1957, as starting point. With that treaty the EEC was formed. Anyway, the parties and celebrations are now, so we might as well stick to that.

[Jonathan]

IIRC they celebrated the 50th anniversary of the coal and steel community back in 2002 but hey, the Rome treaty is also a great excuse for celebrations

[Earniel]

Did they now, I don't recall.

Like your avatar, by the way.

[Jonathan]

Had to commemorate the EU somehow, seeing as no one else in this country seems to do it . I also wore an EU flag pin on my jacket to honour the day.
Well, I'm very positive toward the union

I take it there was more celebrating in Belgium, Eärniel?

[Earniel]

There was a big concert in Brussels yesterday. Lots of people came, although I suppose the fact that it was a free concert had a lot to do with it. Quite a nice collection of singers came. The rest was pretty calm I think.

[Mari]

In 1944 the Benelux was created: a cooperation between Belgium, the Netherlands and Luxembourg. In 1955 the Benelux parliament was created followed in 1958 by the Benelux Economic Union en the Benelux Court of Justice in 1965. Before all this, there were other forms of cooperation allready.
Anyone sees a resemblance to the EU?
The countries of the Benelux were also founding members of what is now the EU.
Somehow only France, Germany, Great Brittain and Spain seem to be mentioned when it comes to the EU. Perhaps that is because (at least in the case of the Netherlands) we tend to be the reconciling parties. Cooperating and trying to agree is what we are famous for.
BUT:
The Netherlands is a country AND a member of the EU. Yes, we actually have implemented the environmental plans of the EU 2 years before the deadline (which cost our farmers a lot, also in the area of competitativeness) as opposed to Germany and France. We are one of the biggest financial contributors to the EU while we are one of the smaller countries. We want to make this work. But that we are trying very hard (too hard as some would argue) doesn't mean that we are reduced to being an insignificant member of a larger EU. (I know, the Netherlands is just like that annoying kid in school who always has finished doing his homework way before the deadline and is trying desperately to be the teachers little favorite )
What I'm trying to point out is that even though we try to cooperate, that doesn't mean that we want to lose our own cultural identity. The Netherlands voted no in the referendum about the European Constitution and I don't think we will change our minds anytime soon. One of the reasons some people voted yes, was because if there was a Constitution, there would also be a system of punishment. At the moment it is very difficult to sanction a big member of the EU, like France or Germany. There is no equality within the EU.
This should be fixed if we ever want the EU to succeed.
There has been some talk of leaving the EU not too long after we voted no, but that would probably be a financial disaster, so it is obivously not very realisitic talk, but still. If a country which has worked a long time to get the EU of the ground thinks of leaving it, there is something wrong.
I think that for too long the EU has moved forward at a fast pace without once stopping to look at the current situation and trying to solve all the excisting problems. It has been mentioned before, but perhaps we should stand still and start solving our fundamental problems, before there is no fundament left.
(Okay, in my head this actually does make sense, but my head isn't very clear, so forgive my foggy reasoning)

[Lief Erikson]

I have a question.

Originally Posted by Mari

What I'm trying to point out is that even though we try to cooperate, that doesn't mean that we want to lose our own cultural identity.

Globalization is drawing all the world, with all cultures and customs, closer and closer together all the time. Everything and everyone is becoming more and more connected. Doesn't the fight to preserve cultural distinctiveness seem like rather a lost cause, therefore, in the long run?

[The Gaffer]

I don't think so. One conesquence will be greater fluidity of cultures, but I don't see them becoming any more homogenised than they already are.

Some people have argued that the impact of globalised, networked culture will be GREATER diversification (e.g. Toffler A, The Third Wave). You can see signs of this already in the music industry (i.e. decline of big name bands, massive explosion of genres, massive growth of downloads, total panic in the big multinational labels, etc etc).

I agree with Mari: Germany and particularly France have got away with ignoring their own rules for too long. The French have more complaints against them for breaches of EU regulations than everyone else put together.