April 28, 2005
EU Constitutional Crisis
As waves of liberty wash over the Middle-East, as they did in "New Europe" after the collapse of the Soviet Union, where else do you suppose their effects are being felt? Why, in "Old Europe" too!
This AP report from two days ago reveals that the socialist citizenry of the socialist state of France, regarded as the principal force behind the EU unification effort, may be getting cold feet.
French polls have shown a steady opposition to the charter. A poll published Friday, indicated 62 percent of voters will reject the constitution in France's May 29 referendum — the highest figure so far.All 25 European Union members must approve the text for it to take effect. A French rejection could spur "no" votes elsewhere.
Opposition is attributed to the anticipated loss of "French jobs and sovereignty in the EU's giant market." Well, DUH! (On the sovereignty part anyway.)
But what of the poor Germans? They won't even get a vote in the matter: "Germany, the most populous EU member with 82 million people, is submitting the charter to lawmakers for approval and does not plan a referendum." Never fear, after France chooses self-rule, the Germans can always stage a popular "Deutsche Freiheit" revolution.
Freedom on the March Posted by JohnGalt at April 28, 2005 2:14 PM
And Andrew Stuttaford has a piece from the London Times about Holland:
"Europe, for the Dutch, has lost its allure. Few politicians now call for an ever-closer union. Even fewer see in Brussels a model of efficiency, probity or accountability. The Dutch are to vote on the European constitution three days after the French referendum. Disillusioned with EU bureaucracy, resentful that they pay a disproportionately high share of the EU’s rising costs and fearful of losing their national identity, the Dutch may vote decisively against...Above all, the country is reacting to years of stifling liberal consensus. There is a backlash against the assumptions that The Hague should pay generously for other Europeans, take a lead in development aid or make concessions to a club dominated by larger members determined to have their own way. The Dutch want to concentrate on priorities at home. What they dislike is not the idea of a constitution, but the accretion of more power to an unaccountable Brussels. The Netherlands has the chance to speak for Europe. The Dutch should vote “nee” in the referendum."
http://www.nationalreview.com/thecorner/05_04_24_corner-archive.asp#061713
Posted by: jk at April 28, 2005 5:24 PMA French "non" vote would have a significant impact on the continent's EU fetish. It might derail the whole experiment.
Posted by: AlexC at April 28, 2005 10:23 PMA question then to ask is, will the Euro currency be affected negatively?
If it is, what's that going to do to the rest of the world? I understand that some markets have moved off of the dollar infavor of the Euro as their currency of choice.
Schadenfreude is a bad thing. I am happy to see the EU constitution fail because I think it is an anti-liberty structure.
Yet to completely unwind the EU Federation, including the common currency, would restrict free movement of goods, labor and capital. I don't want to unwind it, but I don't want to wind it more tightly, unless the constitution were completely restructured.
Posted by: jk at April 29, 2005 1:33 PMIt is instructive to note that, on the subject of a governing Constitution, the EU is not much more advanced than Iraq, and less so than Afghanistan. http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/fields/2063.html As the march of freedom leads to more and more new constitutions across the world, they all face the same difficulty. How to empower a government that doesn't infringe upon individual liberty.
The founders of the USA had it right - government power must be EXPRESSLY limited. Meddlesome bureaucrats and politicians must be held in absolute check when it comes to issues of liberty. America's Constitution is the best model for all the rest, but not in its current form. Most of the amendments should be tossed out. And then we have to reform our courts to ignore the relativistic urge to redefine the Constitution by redefining the words with which it is written.
Posted by: johngalt at April 29, 2005 3:43 PM | What do you think? [4]