Political Crossfire Forums

Achilles The Myrmidon · Joined: 20 Nov 2004 Posts: 4554 Location: Hellas

DSwain wrote: towelhead wrote: You seem to misunderstand the role of the European Union. EU does not simply focus on economic stability. It also focuses on justice and external relations issues. The third pillar of the EU - 'Police and Judicial Co-operation in Criminal Matters' - requires EU institutions to implement european law - acquis communautaire - in members states. This law is superior to local (in this case hungarian) law. Therefore it is the EUs duty to make sure Hungary doesnt distort EU principles such as human rights, democracy or rule of law.

No, I do not misunderstand the role the European Union has imposed on its members - rather I wholeheartedly disagree with it. The EU should be solely about economics as opposed to diktat; as a Czech, I'm surprised that you should so willingly acquiesce to such a monolith after your country's history with the USSR and the Warsaw Pact. Could you please stop comparing the EU with the USSR?Is in your knowlenge any country that the EU force it to join?

DSwain · Joined: 09 Jun 2006 Posts: 3552

Achilles The Myrmidon wrote: DSwain wrote: towelhead wrote: You seem to misunderstand the role of the European Union. EU does not simply focus on economic stability. It also focuses on justice and external relations issues. The third pillar of the EU - 'Police and Judicial Co-operation in Criminal Matters' - requires EU institutions to implement european law - acquis communautaire - in members states. This law is superior to local (in this case hungarian) law. Therefore it is the EUs duty to make sure Hungary doesnt distort EU principles such as human rights, democracy or rule of law.

No, I do not misunderstand the role the European Union has imposed on its members - rather I wholeheartedly disagree with it. The EU should be solely about economics as opposed to diktat; as a Czech, I'm surprised that you should so willingly acquiesce to such a monolith after your country's history with the USSR and the Warsaw Pact. Could you please stop comparing the EU with the USSR?Is in your knowlenge any country that the EU force it to join?

I'll compare what I want with what I want, thank you - that's my right, just as it's your right to disagree. And re our entry - our government and the EEC lied to the British people about what membership would entail. Personally, I'd be very happy if we left.

Achilles The Myrmidon · Joined: 20 Nov 2004 Posts: 4554 Location: Hellas

DSwain wrote: Achilles The Myrmidon wrote: DSwain wrote: towelhead wrote: You seem to misunderstand the role of the European Union. EU does not simply focus on economic stability. It also focuses on justice and external relations issues. The third pillar of the EU - 'Police and Judicial Co-operation in Criminal Matters' - requires EU institutions to implement european law - acquis communautaire - in members states. This law is superior to local (in this case hungarian) law. Therefore it is the EUs duty to make sure Hungary doesnt distort EU principles such as human rights, democracy or rule of law.

No, I do not misunderstand the role the European Union has imposed on its members - rather I wholeheartedly disagree with it. The EU should be solely about economics as opposed to diktat; as a Czech, I'm surprised that you should so willingly acquiesce to such a monolith after your country's history with the USSR and the Warsaw Pact. Could you please stop comparing the EU with the USSR?Is in your knowlenge any country that the EU force it to join?

I'll compare what I want with what I want, thank you - that's my right, just as it's your right to disagree. And re our entry - our government and the EEC lied to the British people about what membership would entail. Personally, I'd be very happy if we left. All Europe will be happy if you left the EU...

I ask again:Is in your knowlwnge any country that the EU force it to join?

towelhead · Joined: 28 Oct 2006 Posts: 18

To DSwain. OK. I see what u mean. But a simple economic alliance is very fragile because it gives off a sense of artificiality. The people should open their eyes and see that they r part of larger world. If we, the poeple, - via the EU - interact in all aspects of life (not just the economic one), we will find that we have a lot in common and can follow the same foreign policy.
I agree that internal policy should remain in the jurisdiction of each and every memberstate.
I dont want mere centralisation.....just federalisation. Federalisation equals effectiveness. Of course the process has to be gradual.

DSwain · Joined: 09 Jun 2006 Posts: 3552

Achilles The Myrmidon wrote: DSwain wrote: Achilles The Myrmidon wrote: DSwain wrote: towelhead wrote: You seem to misunderstand the role of the European Union. EU does not simply focus on economic stability. It also focuses on justice and external relations issues. The third pillar of the EU - 'Police and Judicial Co-operation in Criminal Matters' - requires EU institutions to implement european law - acquis communautaire - in members states. This law is superior to local (in this case hungarian) law. Therefore it is the EUs duty to make sure Hungary doesnt distort EU principles such as human rights, democracy or rule of law.

No, I do not misunderstand the role the European Union has imposed on its members - rather I wholeheartedly disagree with it. The EU should be solely about economics as opposed to diktat; as a Czech, I'm surprised that you should so willingly acquiesce to such a monolith after your country's history with the USSR and the Warsaw Pact. Could you please stop comparing the EU with the USSR?Is in your knowlenge any country that the EU force it to join?

I'll compare what I want with what I want, thank you - that's my right, just as it's your right to disagree. And re our entry - our government and the EEC lied to the British people about what membership would entail. Personally, I'd be very happy if we left. All Europe will be happy if you left the EU...

I ask again:Is in your knowlwnge any country that the EU force it to join?

Oh boo-hoo - (sniff) you want us to leave?

Well, wouldn't be the first time that we were alone in Europe, so no sweat

:wink:

And Achilles - the EEC paid lots of money to pro-membership groups in Britain in advance of the EEC referendum in 1975 and lies were told - that the EEC was just about economics and not about political union.

Achilles The Myrmidon · Joined: 20 Nov 2004 Posts: 4554 Location: Hellas

DSwain wrote: Achilles The Myrmidon wrote: DSwain wrote: Achilles The Myrmidon wrote: DSwain wrote: towelhead wrote: You seem to misunderstand the role of the European Union. EU does not simply focus on economic stability. It also focuses on justice and external relations issues. The third pillar of the EU - 'Police and Judicial Co-operation in Criminal Matters' - requires EU institutions to implement european law - acquis communautaire - in members states. This law is superior to local (in this case hungarian) law. Therefore it is the EUs duty to make sure Hungary doesnt distort EU principles such as human rights, democracy or rule of law.

No, I do not misunderstand the role the European Union has imposed on its members - rather I wholeheartedly disagree with it. The EU should be solely about economics as opposed to diktat; as a Czech, I'm surprised that you should so willingly acquiesce to such a monolith after your country's history with the USSR and the Warsaw Pact. Could you please stop comparing the EU with the USSR?Is in your knowlenge any country that the EU force it to join?

I'll compare what I want with what I want, thank you - that's my right, just as it's your right to disagree. And re our entry - our government and the EEC lied to the British people about what membership would entail. Personally, I'd be very happy if we left. All Europe will be happy if you left the EU...

I ask again:Is in your knowlwnge any country that the EU force it to join?

Oh boo-hoo - (sniff) you want us to leave?

Well, wouldn't be the first time that we were alone in Europe, so no sweat

:wink:

And Achilles - the EEC paid lots of money to pro-membership groups in Britain in advance of the EEC referendum in 1975 and lies were told - that the EEC was just about economics and not about political union. You were alone in Europe in WWII?Thank you very much for the history lesson, mate. :roll:

So i quess Greece was not your allie in WWII?

DSwain · Joined: 09 Jun 2006 Posts: 3552

towelhead wrote: To DSwain. OK. I see what u mean. But a simple economic alliance is very fragile because it gives off a sense of artificiality. The people should open their eyes and see that they r part of larger world. If we, the poeple, - via the EU - interact in all aspects of life (not just the economic one), we will find that we have a lot in common and can follow the same foreign policy.
I agree that internal policy should remain in the jurisdiction of each and every memberstate.
I dont want mere centralisation.....just federalisation. Federalisation equals effectiveness. Of course the process has to be gradual.

Towelhead - I'm glad you don't want more centralisation but a federal system still means that whole levels of laws would be made at a 'United States of Europe' level. Why?

An economic system is not artificial; in fact, the EEC has been wildly successful - operating purely as an economic bloc. We've had fifty years of (broadly speaking) peace in western Europe, economic progress and prosperity - whereas in the preceding 40 years, we had two world wars.

If nations are ltogether, then they physically cannot go to war - that was the whole idea behind the European Coal and Steel Community. But as soon as you force different peoples into the same grouping - as happened in federal Yugoslavia - then you are making trouble. I ask you - why do it? What will such a federation actually do to improve your or my life?

DSwain · Joined: 09 Jun 2006 Posts: 3552

Achilles The Myrmidon wrote: DSwain wrote: Achilles The Myrmidon wrote: DSwain wrote: Achilles The Myrmidon wrote: DSwain wrote: towelhead wrote: You seem to misunderstand the role of the European Union. EU does not simply focus on economic stability. It also focuses on justice and external relations issues. The third pillar of the EU - 'Police and Judicial Co-operation in Criminal Matters' - requires EU institutions to implement european law - acquis communautaire - in members states. This law is superior to local (in this case hungarian) law. Therefore it is the EUs duty to make sure Hungary doesnt distort EU principles such as human rights, democracy or rule of law.

No, I do not misunderstand the role the European Union has imposed on its members - rather I wholeheartedly disagree with it. The EU should be solely about economics as opposed to diktat; as a Czech, I'm surprised that you should so willingly acquiesce to such a monolith after your country's history with the USSR and the Warsaw Pact. Could you please stop comparing the EU with the USSR?Is in your knowlenge any country that the EU force it to join?

I'll compare what I want with what I want, thank you - that's my right, just as it's your right to disagree. And re our entry - our government and the EEC lied to the British people about what membership would entail. Personally, I'd be very happy if we left. All Europe will be happy if you left the EU...

I ask again:Is in your knowlwnge any country that the EU force it to join?

Oh boo-hoo - (sniff) you want us to leave?

Well, wouldn't be the first time that we were alone in Europe, so no sweat

:wink:

And Achilles - the EEC paid lots of money to pro-membership groups in Britain in advance of the EEC referendum in 1975 and lies were told - that the EEC was just about economics and not about political union. You were alone in Europe in WWII?Thank you very much for the history lesson, mate. :roll:

So i quess Greece was not your allie in WWII?

You weren't standing with us in 1940. Britain was alone in Europe (but obviously Australia, Canada, New Zealand, South Africa, India etc were all playing major parts in fighting the Axis - but these are not European nations)

And not after 1941 you weren't; you fought bloody hard but, just like other countries, you fell. BTW - I think Britain would have fallen as well, but thank God for the English Channel - we survived due to an accident of geography.

towelhead · Joined: 28 Oct 2006 Posts: 18

DSwain wrote: towelhead wrote: To DSwain. OK. I see what u mean. But a simple economic alliance is very fragile because it gives off a sense of artificiality. The people should open their eyes and see that they r part of larger world. If we, the poeple, - via the EU - interact in all aspects of life (not just the economic one), we will find that we have a lot in common and can follow the same foreign policy.
I agree that internal policy should remain in the jurisdiction of each and every memberstate.
I dont want mere centralisation.....just federalisation. Federalisation equals effectiveness. Of course the process has to be gradual.

Towelhead - I'm glad you don't want more centralisation but a federal system still means that whole levels of laws would be made at a 'United States of Europe' level. Why?

An economic system is not artificial; in fact, the EEC has been wildly successful - operating purely as an economic bloc. We've had fifty years of (broadly speaking) peace in western Europe, economic progress and prosperity - whereas in the preceding 40 years, we had two world wars.

If nations are ltogether, then they physically cannot go to war - that was the whole idea behind the European Coal and Steel Community. But as soon as you force different peoples into the same grouping - as happened in federal Yugoslavia - then you are making trouble. I ask you - why do it? What will such a federation actually do to improve your or my life?

Yugoslavia is a bad example - it didnt have a democratic regime plus the process of unification wasnt gradual plus there is a fairly large muslim minority in Bosnia which sought alliance with the turks rather than with serb communist. Serbia also played a hegemonic role within the so-called union.

DSwain · Joined: 09 Jun 2006 Posts: 3552

towelhead wrote: DSwain wrote: towelhead wrote: To DSwain. OK. I see what u mean. But a simple economic alliance is very fragile because it gives off a sense of artificiality. The people should open their eyes and see that they r part of larger world. If we, the poeple, - via the EU - interact in all aspects of life (not just the economic one), we will find that we have a lot in common and can follow the same foreign policy.
I agree that internal policy should remain in the jurisdiction of each and every memberstate.
I dont want mere centralisation.....just federalisation. Federalisation equals effectiveness. Of course the process has to be gradual.

Towelhead - I'm glad you don't want more centralisation but a federal system still means that whole levels of laws would be made at a 'United States of Europe' level. Why?

An economic system is not artificial; in fact, the EEC has been wildly successful - operating purely as an economic bloc. We've had fifty years of (broadly speaking) peace in western Europe, economic progress and prosperity - whereas in the preceding 40 years, we had two world wars.

If nations are ltogether, then they physically cannot go to war - that was the whole idea behind the European Coal and Steel Community. But as soon as you force different peoples into the same grouping - as happened in federal Yugoslavia - then you are making trouble. I ask you - why do it? What will such a federation actually do to improve your or my life?

Yugoslavia is a bad example - it didnt have a democratic regime plus the process of unification wasnt gradual plus there is a fairly large muslim minority in Bosnia which sought alliance with the turks rather than with serb communist. Serbia also played a hegemonic role within the so-called union.

IMO it's entirely appropriate: the EU is an organisation that involves one huge economy (Germany), then three more slightly smaller (UK/France/Italy) and then Spain and Poland leading the rest. Germany wields much of the economic power in the Eurozone at the moment, while France exercises the political power - as it would be in any United States of Europe. Why were Portugal and Ireland reprimanded for breaking Eurozone rules on public deficits? And yet Germany and France were not? I would also add that any political union of EU countries would be entirely sudden and not the object of a gradual evolution and, just like Yugoslavia, it would be the product of the conference table and not of the will of the people.

And as for the religious element - I assume you've been reading about Turkish accession?

Towelhead - why do we need a United States of Europe?

towelhead · Joined: 28 Oct 2006 Posts: 18

To answer ur question - 'why do it?' A European federation would become much more influential in global politics. It could easily compete with other rising powers - russia and china.

DSwain · Joined: 09 Jun 2006 Posts: 3552

towelhead wrote: To answer ur question - 'why do it?' A European federation would become much more influential in global politics. It could easily compete with other rising powers - russia and china.

So in order for Europe to be a 'superpower', we should just ignore what people actually want? Heck, why don't we all just apply to join the United States of America - in that way, we'll be even stronger.

towelhead · Joined: 28 Oct 2006 Posts: 18

DSwain wrote: towelhead wrote: To answer ur question - 'why do it?' A European federation would become much more influential in global politics. It could easily compete with other rising powers - russia and china.

So in order for Europe to be a 'superpower', we should just ignore what people actually want? Heck, why don't we all just apply to join the United States of America - in that way, we'll be even stronger.

Why do u keep talking about 'what the people want'. Was the EU not a product of the peoples will?! The people sitting in the EU parliamnet - are they not representatives of the people??? And by the way: do u think people should be materialist and care only for their wealth. Dont u think, people should realise there is larger world?! I think people should be made to see the distant threats such as North Korea. Because one day these threats are gonna become real.

MoscowMatt · Joined: 16 Sep 2005 Posts: 1647 Location: UK / Hungary

Achilles The Myrmidon wrote: All Europe will be happy if you left the EU...

Really? Would that include the Eastern European countries who's people are allowed unrestricted entry to Britain to work? We are one of only a few EU countries to allow this. Yeah I'm sure Poland would love to see Britain kicked out of the EU. :roll:

DSwain · Joined: 09 Jun 2006 Posts: 3552

towelhead wrote: DSwain wrote: towelhead wrote: To answer ur question - 'why do it?' A European federation would become much more influential in global politics. It could easily compete with other rising powers - russia and china.

So in order for Europe to be a 'superpower', we should just ignore what people actually want? Heck, why don't we all just apply to join the United States of America - in that way, we'll be even stronger.

Why do u keep talking about 'what the people want'. Was the EU not a product of the peoples will?! The people sitting in the EU parliamnet - are they not representatives of the people??? And by the way: do u think people should be materialist and care only for their wealth. Dont u think, people should realise there is larger world?! I think people should be made to see the distant threats such as North Korea. Because one day these threats are gonna become real.

Show me where there has been a groundswell of opinion demanding that the are governed from Brussels and Strasbourg? Look at the Constitution; agreed on by certain parliaments, rejected by the people when they themselves were asked.

The reason that all countries joined the EEC /EC/EU was economics - money. Why did your country join? For the money, for the fact that you would have access to European funds to improve your roads and railways, to pay your farmers and you'd be able to sell your goods in a massive internal market. Tell me - how many Czech politicians stood up and said to you "Hey, tell you what - if we go into the EU, Czech law will be worthless and in fact we'd like to dissolve our nation state and be part of a federal Europe".

DSwain · Joined: 09 Jun 2006 Posts: 3552

MoscowMatt wrote: Achilles The Myrmidon wrote: All Europe will be happy if you left the EU...

Really? Would that include the Eastern European countries who's people are allowed unrestricted entry to Britain to work? We are one of only a few EU countries to allow this. Yeah I'm sure Poland would love to see Britain kicked out of the EU. :roll:

Indeed; tell me Achilles, when is Greece opening up its borders to workers from eastern Europe? Or is this a case when other countries talk big, yet Britain actually does it?

towelhead · Joined: 28 Oct 2006 Posts: 18

But czech law didnt disappear off the face of the planet. Now there r two separate laws (just like in the US) - a european law which is superior and a czech law which is inferior. The Eu law just sets a frame of limitations. I personally didnt vote to join the EU because i wanted to see the road outside my house to improve. I wanted to be part of an organisation that stands up for principles that i believe are worth fighting for.

DSwain · Joined: 09 Jun 2006 Posts: 3552

towelhead wrote: But czech law didnt disappear off the face of the planet. Now there r two separate laws (just like in the US) - a european law which is superior and a czech law which is inferior. The Eu law just sets a frame of limitations. I personally didnt vote to join the EU because i wanted to see the road outside my house to improve. I wanted to be part of an organisation that stands up for principles that i believe are worth fighting for.

But this is not the United States of America - we are not a country, we are not a federal state. I am a British subject, not a European citizen.

It is an absolute travesty that Czech law and British law is subservient to an alien body. Why should I care about what you do in your country? So long as our countries can trade with each other, so long as we don't fight each other and so long as we are both safe from exterior threats, then that's where our concern should end - what do I gain by my representative interfering in laws that affect you and what do you gain by having your representative interfering in laws that affect me?

MoscowMatt · Joined: 16 Sep 2005 Posts: 1647 Location: UK / Hungary

towelhead wrote: But czech law didnt disappear off the face of the planet. Now there r two separate laws (just like in the US) - a european law which is superior and a czech law which is inferior. The Eu law just sets a frame of limitations. I personally didnt vote to join the EU because i wanted to see the road outside my house to improve. I wanted to be part of an organisation that stands up for principles that i believe are worth fighting for.

The EU is a bit like the UN in which all the main players fight for what they can get out of it and don't care about the smaller countries!

towelhead · Joined: 28 Oct 2006 Posts: 18

MoscowMatt wrote: towelhead wrote: But czech law didnt disappear off the face of the planet. Now there r two separate laws (just like in the US) - a european law which is superior and a czech law which is inferior. The Eu law just sets a frame of limitations. I personally didnt vote to join the EU because i wanted to see the road outside my house to improve. I wanted to be part of an organisation that stands up for principles that i believe are worth fighting for.

The EU is a bit like the UN in which all the main players fight for what they can get out of it and don't care about the smaller countries!

The EU is not anything like the UN. The UN has 194 memberstates some of which are openly hostile to other. U dont see any hostility of such a scale on the eu ground. The UNs role is to act as a forum where all the players - big and small - sit down and talk. The EU is much more active as it seeks economic progress and political unity.