Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 60

Thread: The Future of the European Union

  1. #21
    Senior Member SineNomine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Last Online
    Sunday, November 9th, 2008 @ 06:25 AM
    Ethnicity
    Germanic
    Subrace
    Mediterranid
    Country
    England England
    Location
    Nord du pays
    Gender
    Age
    33
    Family
    Single
    Occupation
    Student
    Politics
    Libertarian
    Religion
    MYOB
    Posts
    2,132
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1
    Thanked in
    1 Post

    Re: The Netherlands and the EU Constitution

    Meanwhile, most debate visitors have spoken for more democracy and more unified legislation in Europe, which is actually what the constitution stands for. The results of the debates will be sent to Prime Minister Balkenende.
    I seriously doubt that 250 visitors can speak for all 450+ million citizens of the EU...

  2. #22
    Senior Member Carl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Last Online
    Thursday, March 29th, 2012 @ 11:51 AM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo - Saxon.
    Ancestry
    English
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Country
    England England
    State
    Wessex Wessex
    Location
    south
    Gender
    Occupation
    [Psychologist]
    Politics
    Patriotic
    Religion
    Pagan
    Posts
    1,940
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    6
    Thanked in
    6 Posts

    Re: The Netherlands and the EU Constitution

    Quote Originally Posted by SineNomine View Post
    I seriously doubt that 250 visitors can speak for all 450+ million citizens of the EU...
    one must obviously be fearful that the democratic debate will be rigged next time round. I notice that they are looking for a government change in France - possibly with a useful outcome for them. Its a lot easier if people "are thought FOR".... they would find it a far simpler way of getting what they wanted - as in Germany perhaps.

  3. #23
    Funding Member
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Schmetterling's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    German
    Gender
    Age
    36
    Posts
    756
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    30
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    63
    Thanked in
    30 Posts

    Ten Reasons to Get Rid of the European Union

    Fjordman - 1/30/2008

    I intend to write a text called “Ten Reasons to Get Rid of the European Union” This text will be written with me as editor and contributor, but not necessarily sole writer. I will post some ideas here which can be expanded upon by blog readers. I will then post a second, more elaborate draft, make some changes to that, and then post the final version. It is my intention that this text should be translated into major European languages and be republished or reprinted in various EU countries. If you post comments here, you thus give your permission to allow your writings to be incorporated into this text and republished elsewhere.

    The proponents of the European Union claim that it is a “peace project.” But the EU is not about peace, it is about war: A demographic and cultural war waged against an entire continent, from the Black Sea to the North Sea, in order to destroy European nation states and build an empire run by self-appointed and unaccountable bureaucrats. This is supported by national politicians in order to enhance their personal power, by creating a larger political entity than their individual nation states and by ridding themselves of the constraints of a democratic society. The EU thus corrupts national political elites into betraying the people they are supposed to serve and protect.

    Anthony Coughlan, a senior lecturer at Trinity College in Dublin, Ireland, notes:


    At a national level when a minister wants to get something done, he or she must have the backing of the prime minister, must have the agreement of the minister for finance if it means spending money, and above all must have majority support in the national parliament, and implicitly amongst voters in the country. Shift the policy area in question to the supranational level of Brussels however, where laws are made primarily by the 27-member Council of Ministers, and the minister in question becomes a member of an oligarchy, a committee of lawmakers, the most powerful in history, making laws for 500 million Europeans, and irremovable as a group regardless of what it does. National parliaments and citizens lose power with every EU treaty, for they no longer have the final say in the policy areas concerned. Individual ministers on the other hand obtain an intoxicating increase in personal power, as they are transformed from members of the executive arm of government at national level, subordinate to a national legislature, into EU-wide legislators at the supranational.
    EU ministers see themselves as political architects of a superpower in the making. They can also free themselves from scrutiny of their actions by elected national parliaments. According to Coughlan, EU integration represents “a gradual coup by government executives against legislatures, and by politicians against the citizens who elect them.” This process is now sucking the reality of power from “traditional government institutions, while leaving these still formally intact. They still keep their old names — parliament, government, supreme court — so that their citizens do not get too alarmed, but their classical functions have been transformed.”

    The European Union is basically an attempt by the elites in European nation states to cooperate on usurping power, bypassing and abolishing the democratic system, a slow-motion coup d’état. Ideas such as “promoting peace” or “promoting free trade” are used as a pretext for this, a bone thrown to fool the gullible masses and veil what is essentially a naked power grab.

    The European Union is now suppressing free speech across Europe in the name of Multiculturalism and tolerance. Free speech is the hallmark of freedom. When the EU is suppressing free speech, it is repressing freedom itself. The EU has thus become a tyranny, and the laws and regulations it is passing are illegitimate.

    The EU is deliberately destroying the cultural traditions of member states by flooding them with non-European immigrants and eradicating native traditions. This is a gross violation of the rights of the indigenous peoples across an entire continent. Forcing native Germans, Brits, Italians, Dutch, Greeks, Swedes or others to fund their own colonization, to suffer abuse and violence in their own countries and watch as their heritage gets extinguished is evil, not tolerant. Native Europeans are taught that we should be grateful for the cultural traditions Pakistanis, Iraqis or Nigerians bring to our countries. We are also told that we “don’t have a culture.” This is an insult to thousands of years of Greco-Roman, Judeo-Christian, Germanic, Celtic and Slavic history. Europe has one of the richest cultural and artistic traditions on the planet. To replace this with sharia barbarism is not just a crime against Europe, it is a crime against humanity.

    The European Union is the principal motor behind the Islamization of Europe, perhaps the greatest betrayal in this civilization’s history. Appeasement of Islam and Muslims is so deeply immersed into the structural DNA of the EU that the only way to stop the Islamization of Europe is to get rid of the EU. All of it.

    The European Union has created a borderless Europe from Greece to France and from Romania to Spain and Portugal, yet the citizens of these countries still pay the vast majority of their taxes to nation states whose borders are no longer upheld. It is ridiculous to pay up to half of your income to an entity that no longer has any semblance of control with its own territory. Unless national borders are reestablished, the citizens of all EU member states no longer have any obligation to pay taxes. We do, however, have the right to arm ourselves. As the authorities from Berlin via Amsterdam to London and Rome fail spectacularly to uphold law and order, citizens have not just the right, but the duty to arm themselves in order to protect their property and the lives of their loved ones.

    The European Union cannot be anything but anti-liberty because it concentrates far too much power in a centralized system that is almost impossible for outsiders to understand. As the Austrian economist Friedrich Hayek warned in The Road to Serfdom:
    - - - - - - - - -



    To imagine that the economic life of a vast area comprising many different people can be directed or planned by democratic procedure betrays a complete lack of awareness of the problems such planning would raise. Planning on an international scale, even more than is true on a national scale, cannot be anything but a naked rule of force, an imposition by a small group on all the rest of that sort of standard and employment which the planners think suitable for the rest.


    We shall not rebuild civilisation on the large scale. It is no accident that on the whole there was more beauty and decency to be found in the life of the small peoples, and that among the large ones there was more happiness and content in proportion as they had avoided the deadly blight of centralisation. Least of all shall we preserve democracy or foster its growth if all the power and most of the decisions rest with an organisation far too big for the common man to survey or comprehend. Nowhere has democracy ever worked well without a great measure of local self-government, providing a school of political training for the people at large as much as for their future leaders. It is only where responsibility can be learnt and practised in affairs with which most people are familiar, where it is awareness of one’s neighbour rather than some theoretical knowledge of the needs of other people which guides action, that the ordinary man can take a real part in public affairs because they concern the world he knows. Where the scope of the political measures become so large that the necessary knowledge is almost exclusively possessed by the bureaucracy, the creative impulses of the private person must flag.


    The European Union is deeply flawed in its basic construction, and cannot function as anything other than an increasingly totalitarian pan-European dictatorship, run by a self-appointed oligarchy. Indeed, there is reason to fear that it was specifically designed that way. There cannot be a European democracy because there is no European demos, no European “nation” with a shared sense of pre-political loyalty. Moreover, power in the EU is concentrated heavily in institutions that are not just above the formal restraints of public consent, but also above the informal restraints of public scrutiny and insight. In short: The EU authorities can do more or less whatever they want to, as they do in relations to the Arab and Islamic world.




    We should study the work of the great eighteenth century French thinker Charles Montesquieu, who admired the British political system. He advocated that the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of government should be assigned to different bodies, where each of them would not be powerful enough to impose its will on society. This is because “constant experience shows us that every man invested with power is apt to abuse it, and to carry his authority as far as it will go.” This separation of powers is almost totally absent in the European Union, where there is weak to non-existent separation between the legislative, the executive and indeed the judicial branches, and where all of them function without the consent of the public. In short, a small number of people can draft and implement laws without consulting the people, and these take precedence over the laws passed by elected assemblies. This is a blueprint for a dictatorship.

    In 2007, former German president Roman Herzog warned that parliamentary democracy was under threat from the EU. Between 1999 and 2004, 84 percent of the legal acts in Germany — and the majority in all EU member states — stemmed from Brussels. According to Herzog, “EU policies suffer to an alarming degree from a lack of democracy and a de facto suspension of the separation of powers.” Despite this, the EU was largely a non-issue during the 2005 German elections. One gets the feeling that the real issues of substance are not subject to public debate. National elections are becoming an increasingly empty ritual. The important issues have already been settled beforehand behind closed doors. Free citizens should obey laws that are passed with their consent and with the best interests of their nation and people in mind. Most of the laws across the European Union are now not passed by elected national representatives, but by unaccountable EU bureaucrats. As such, the citizens of these nations no longer have any obligation to obey these laws.

    As Montesquieu warned, “When the legislative and executive powers are united in the same person, or in the same body of magistrates, there can be no liberty; because apprehensions may arise, lest the same monarch or senate should enact tyrannical laws, to execute them in a tyrannical manner.” He also stated that “Useless laws weaken the necessary laws.” The problem with the EU is not just the content of laws, but their volume. Law-abiding citizens are being turned into criminals by laws regulating speech and behavior, while real criminals rule the streets in our cities. This situation will either lead to a police state, to a total breakdown in law and order, or both.

    Source

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to Schmetterling For This Useful Post:


  5. #24
    Senior Member Carl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Last Online
    Thursday, March 29th, 2012 @ 11:51 AM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo - Saxon.
    Ancestry
    English
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Country
    England England
    State
    Wessex Wessex
    Location
    south
    Gender
    Occupation
    [Psychologist]
    Politics
    Patriotic
    Religion
    Pagan
    Posts
    1,940
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    6
    Thanked in
    6 Posts
    A large posting - with no comments from the poster!

    Whatever has Germany done to oppose the EU ?

  6. #25
    Senior Member Carl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Last Online
    Thursday, March 29th, 2012 @ 11:51 AM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo - Saxon.
    Ancestry
    English
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Country
    England England
    State
    Wessex Wessex
    Location
    south
    Gender
    Occupation
    [Psychologist]
    Politics
    Patriotic
    Religion
    Pagan
    Posts
    1,940
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    6
    Thanked in
    6 Posts

    The European Union in Crisis - What of its Future?

    The European Union is , yet again, in something of a crisis. France and the Netherlands rejected the original Constitution which was then 'revised' into the current Lisbon Treaty. This is now be rejected by the voters of Ireland. The Treaty necessitates by law (?) that ALL States should agree to it.


    There is obviously now considerable confusion! ::eyes:

    How can all this continue? Has the EU and its structures any future. If not , what should be the future for our Europe ?


    EU referendum: Row over leaving Ireland out of decision-making


    Luxembourg
    Telegraph 17/06/2008

    A row over the European Union's Lisbon Treaty threatened to break out as Britain rejected French and German suggestions that Ireland could be left out of EU decision-making after rejecting the treaty in a referendum.
    Gordon Brown insisted that the Government would go ahead with parliamentary plans to ratify the treaty as EU foreign ministers meeting in Luxembourg agreed that last week's Irish referendum defeat would not stop the Lisbon process. :

    But European leaders are struggling to present a united front after the Irish vote, with Paris and Berlin leading calls effectively to ignore the referendum result.

    Ireland's rejection threatens the treaty, which must be endorsed by all 27 EU members before it comes into force next year, creating a new EU president and foreign minister, and ending scores of national vetoes.

    EU foreign ministers formally agreed to give the Irish government "time to make suggestions" about how to reconcile the country to the Lisbon Treaty. (!)

    But France and Germany are impatient to push ahead with the measures and hinted at moving on without Ireland.

    The German foreign ministry said it was now possible that Ireland could be left out of some EU decisions.

    Paris has dismayed Ireland by continuing to play down the significance of last Friday's referendum vote.

    Jean-Pierre Jouyet, the French Europe Minister, insisted that regardless of the Irish rejection, the EU would be able to implement the treaty, including the selection of a president, after a delay.
    "It is not the end of the world," he said.

    Mr Brown is under intense pressure to declare the treaty dead in the wake of the Irish vote. He made clear that the Lisbon process must proceed with Ireland's participation or not at all.


    He said: "The legal position on the European treaty is very clear: that all 27 members must sign and ratify the treaty before it comes into force.

    "Ireland should be given this time for reflection on what they need to do and then make their decisions on how the situation can be resolved."

    While Mr Brown is not prepared to declare the treaty dead himself, some sources are hoping that a row over the Irish result could effectively kill off the document, based on the old, defeated European Constitution.

    ======================

    The EU reveals its anti-democratic nature

    Telegraph 17/06/2008


    David Miliband, the Foreign Secretary, said in the Commons yesterday that Ireland's rejection of the Lisbon Treaty last week "must be respected".

    He also said that the rules of the EU are "clear" - that a treaty falls if it does not command the unanimous support of all 27 member states. And he insisted there could be no "bulldozing" of the Irish into changing their position. eyes:

    Admirable sentiments, all. (!! ) Mr Miliband then stood all three statements on their head by making it clear that Ireland's courageous vote is not going to be accepted by Europe's ruling elites, that the Government will press on regardless with ratification of the treaty, and that it is up the Irish to sort this mess out - in other words, change its mind.:

    Such unattractive contortions become inevitable when attempts are made to reconcile the irreconcilable.

    The Government's position is now doubly untenable.

    In breach of a clear manifesto commitment, it has refused to allow a referendum on the new treaty. Yet Mr Miliband dropped the broadest of hints yesterday that the best way out of this impasse would be for Ireland to vote again.:

    As his Tory shadow, William Hague, observed, the Government wants the Irish to vote twice when the British have not been allowed to vote once.

    The Government stands to tie itself in further knots later this week when EU heads meet in Brussels, for its resistance to a two-speed Europe is going to come into collision with the French and Germans, who see that as the likeliest way out of this crisis. Both Berlin and Paris have said, pretty explicitly, that they are ready to see an ungrateful Ireland consigned to the outer reaches of the EU for this aberrant decision.

    Such ugly bullying is a further stain on the EU. When the voters of the Netherlands and France rejected the EU constitution in 2005, there was none of this sinister nonsense. It was immediately accepted that the constitution was dead.

    The distasteful message here is that if big countries deliver an inconvenient democratic verdict, it will be accepted, but if a small country does, it will be ignored, circumvented, undermined.

    It confirms, if confirmation were needed, that the EU is not undemocratic but anti-democratic. The Government's collusion in all of this is shameful. We trust the House of Lords will reject the Lisbon Treaty in tomorrow's third reading vote to show the people of Ireland that they are not alone.

    And Europe's political leaders should beware. There is a mood of rebellion afoot and it will not be assuaged by refusing people a democratic say. As Mr Hague said yesterday, no lasting political institutions can be built in democratic societies without the consent of the people.


    ======= they have been warned ...........eyes:

  7. #26
    Senior Administrator "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Aeternitas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    German
    Gender
    Family
    Married
    Politics
    Libertarian
    Religion
    Christian
    Posts
    1,566
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    44
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    385
    Thanked in
    131 Posts
    It's not surprising that France* and Germany suggested that Ireland be left out of EU decision-making.

    * Here France for example is meant to refer to the political elites, and not to the population, who had rejected the EU Constitution. To quote Nicolas Sarkozy, "There will be no treaty at all if we had a referendum in France."

    The way I see it, the Eurocrats will just push their way forward anyway. The Lisbon Treaty is really a resurrection of the EU Constitution. This quote by Giuliano Amato sheds some light on the matter: "The good thing about not calling it a Constitution is that no one can ask for a referendum on it.", as does this other quote by Dermot Ahern: "The substance of what was agreed in 2004 has been retained. What is gone is the term 'constitution'." So, while the word "Constitution" has been dropped out of this treaty, some of the elements suppressing national sovereignty remain. Here's an article that does a good job at outlining them IMO:

    President of Europe - Both the Constitution and Treaty contain plans to create an EU President.

    Tony Blair has been named a frontrunner for a top post that will come with an official Brussels residence, a large political staff and, possibly, a personal plane.

    The EU "Prez" will serve a two and half year term but unlike democratic heads of state he or she will be chosen by Europe's leaders not by voters.
    Europe's President will take over key international negotiations from national heads of government.

    Foreign Policy - The old Constitution created an EU "Foreign Minister", the new Treaty a "High Representative". The title has been chopped but his powers remain the same.

    The new "High Rep" will run a powerful EU diplomatic service and will be more important on the global and European stage than national foreign ministers.

    EU Interior Ministry - The Treaty creates a Standing Committee on Internal Security, already known as COSI.

    The new body, dubbed an "Interior Ministry" by civil liberties campaigners, will centralise databases holding fingerprints and DNA.

    Composed of unelected "securocrats", COSI will also make EU legislation on new police and surveillance powers.

    The end of 40 vetoes - Under the new Treaty 40 national vetoes - allowing Britain and any member state to block EU measures that are against their national interests - are scrapped outright. At a time of soaring fuel prices, new EU energy powers will force the UK to free-up its oil reserves to other countries in a energy crisis.

    EU law becomes supreme - The Treaty includes a clause hardwiring an EU "legal personality" and ascendancy over national courts. The Government claims that there is an "opt-out" on the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights which creates a "right to strike". But EU lawyers say the opt-out is not worth the paper it is written on. The Charter apply to the 75 per cent of UK legislation made in Brussels.
    The EU seems to be afraid of referendums. That was pretty obvious since earlier times, when the Constitution received these two no votes from EU members and other referendums were postponed or canceled and the politicians took some time for "reflection".

    So, the way I see it, the eurocrats will just make up new excuses to ignore the referendums and go ahead with the treaty. The EU is clearly not a democratic system. But then again, it was never meant to be a democratic system to begin with. To quote Jose M. Barroso, "If a referendum had to be held on the creation of the European Community or the introduction of the euro, do you think these would have passed?" It's only a matter of time, IMO, until the masses begin to realize it. So, atm at least, the EU needs a very strong force to hold it together, and systems that need force and pushing to the limits to be held together would not last forever.

  8. #27
    Senior Member Carl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Last Online
    Thursday, March 29th, 2012 @ 11:51 AM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo - Saxon.
    Ancestry
    English
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Country
    England England
    State
    Wessex Wessex
    Location
    south
    Gender
    Occupation
    [Psychologist]
    Politics
    Patriotic
    Religion
    Pagan
    Posts
    1,940
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    6
    Thanked in
    6 Posts
    It is so obvious that its the same thing I do agree. The Euro-Elites just don't seem to care what the people think. Our Oppositions are demanding a Vote - even the Liberals think it isn't right to ignore popular opinion. Were Britain to have the Referedum, the Treaty would be stone dead -- the issue is that clear here at the moment. "Franco-Germany" would then have to figure our what to do next !!

    A Europe of Nations perhaps -- or different arrangements.?

    =======

    a Letter from Frederick Forsyth, Hertford
    Telegraph. 17 June


    EU treaty in court

    Sir - It has been widely asserted that the Irish were accorded their referendum because their constitution demanded it. Not quite true.

    In Ireland, a referendum must be held only for a treaty that transfers Irish sovereignty elsewhere, and it was the Irish judges who decreed that this criterion was amply met and a referendum had to be held. The Dublin establishment certainly did not want one.

    Here, both Labour and Lib Dems have been loud in their wail that Lisbon was only a tidying-up exercise with nothing new in it. Once again someone has been lying to us, and it was not the judges of Ireland. They actually read the treaty and decreed there were huge transfers in it.


    --------------------

    Pretty clear ,I think!

  9. #28
    Funding Member
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Ossi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    East German
    Subrace
    Faelid
    Country
    Germany Germany
    State
    Berlin Berlin
    Location
    Berlin
    Gender
    Age
    43
    Family
    Married parent
    Politics
    National
    Religion
    None
    Posts
    670
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    4
    Thanked in
    4 Posts
    The support for all this garbage mainly comes from our lovely chancelloress.

    I think the EU will eventually collapse. It's a kind of empire that oppresses multiple nations. All big empires in history collapsed at some point, and so will this one.

  10. #29
    Senior Member Thrymheim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Last Online
    Thursday, October 15th, 2009 @ 09:32 PM
    Ethnicity
    Welsh/Scandinavian
    Country
    Scotland Scotland
    Location
    Aberdeen
    Gender
    Occupation
    student/Bar supervisor
    Politics
    mixed
    Religion
    Heathen
    Posts
    613
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1
    Thanked in
    1 Post
    It will indeed collapse, but will it do so fast enough for there to be no lasting damage? That I doubt, if too much power is taken away from national governments and they become accustomed to this lack of power, then the collapse of the governing body (the EU) will create a vacuum that needs filling. What or who will step into this to lead I have no idea but I can be reasonably sure that it will be an extremist of some type.

    As to whether the treaty is dead, obviously not, some group somewhere wants to create a European super-state, and they will not allow petty problems like the will of the people to interfere. (IRA come back all is forgiven) It is perfectly possible that this group believes that they are doing the best thing for the member states, but in a time when countries are splitting it is perhaps not the best time to join countries with no joint history except war together. On a slightly more conspiratorial note (I loath conspiracy theories) I would like to know exactly who is going to benefit from this extra layer of bureaucracy as has been said before "the bureaucracy is expanding to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy." All well and good when things are going well, but with a downturn on the cards things are going to turn sour all too soon.

    So the question I have is; what are we going to do about it? No good sitting at our computers griping action is needed and fast.(well as fast as a top heavy bureaucracy will allow)
    Cattle die, kinsmen die,
    the self must also die;
    but glory never dies,
    For the one who is able to achieve it.

    Sayings of the High One.

  11. #30
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Last Online
    Friday, April 3rd, 2009 @ 10:10 PM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    Norwegian
    Ancestry
    Maternal: Norway, Paternal: Massachusetts
    Subrace
    I don't know Lundman's taxonomy.
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    Connecticut Connecticut
    Location
    South Glastonbury, Connecticut
    Gender
    Age
    89
    Family
    Single, not looking
    Occupation
    Nothing (retired)
    Politics
    monarchist
    Religion
    agnostic
    Posts
    1,701
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2
    Thanked in
    2 Posts

    What future, IF ANY, for the European Union ?

    It has always seemed to me that the European Union is fundamentally unstable. No treaty can legislate out of existence the centuries-old animosities between some of the EU members. When they most need solidarity is when these animosities will come to the surface.

    Some EU nations [Italy, for example] have notoriously shaky economies. Brussells will have to shore them up when faced by another impending collapse like those which have occurred periodically and repeatedly since World War II. But all of the EU member nations will feel the bite of subsidising an unstable economy through repeated crises. This is bound to strain whatever unity the EU may possess.

    I wonder, does the EU charter, or treaty, or constitution or whatever it is called , permit secession ? I can easily envision that this issue may arise and very likely soon. Those nations whose referenda are being ignored may well force the issue.

    I have little confidence in the long-term stability of the European Union.

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. The European Union: For or Against?
    By nsrus in forum Politics & Geopolitics
    Replies: 101
    Last Post: Wednesday, January 10th, 2018, 02:51 PM
  2. The Dutch Trust the European Union
    By Dagna in forum Netherlands & Flanders
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: Saturday, March 7th, 2009, 11:43 PM
  3. Why did Norway not join the European Union?
    By morfrain_encilgar in forum Norway
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: Friday, May 27th, 2005, 09:18 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •