Kybernetia
05-08-2004, 16:51
Ok then. There is the example of spain and UK. Both are a mix of different cultures and languages. ok came together through war, but both seem to be better for it all in all.
I'm necessarily for a centralised government. Could be a confederacy or something similar.
Oh god, you are for the French modell, bum, bum, bum.
Since when is the UK mulit-lingual by the way. The Irish broke out of this union as a matter of fact. And almost all the former colonies as well. The same happened to other great empires.
And by the way: the forming of empire was mainly done through war. The German unification of 1871 was done under Prussian leadership and supremacy. Aside of the fact that there was a movement for national union as well and the idea was very popular. There isn´t such a thing about Europe, though. And not to slightest degree for the world.
Politics is still organized on a national level. The same is the case with the public attention span which is mainly focused on national issues.
The EU is a muti-national organisation. You are right with it in one point. It needs to be decided what modell the EU should follow - or rather how the combination of models should look like. The British modell: An union of nations and not a super-state, inter-governmental cooperation and involvement of national parliaments and unanimity principle for defense, foreign and tax policy (those three require unanity according to the draft constituition).
The French model: A more centralized union, though still with a strong position of the national governments.
The German model: A federal Europe with national governments hand some power to the EU but some to their regions. Subsidiary principle garanteed: only responsible of the higher level if the lower level can´t deal with an issue.
The proposed new voting procedure in the council of ministers (the so called double majority (majority of states and population - Franco-German proposal was 50% of the states, who represent 60% of the people - passed was as compromise 55% of the states who represent 65% of the population) was mainly a german idea, though.
It reflects the federal and duel character of the EU: an union of states and of people. But it is never going to be a super state - which would after all mean: no national states any more. It is going to remain both.
And by the way: since when is Britain a part of Europe???? You are not the continent - aren´t you?
I'm necessarily for a centralised government. Could be a confederacy or something similar.
Oh god, you are for the French modell, bum, bum, bum.
Since when is the UK mulit-lingual by the way. The Irish broke out of this union as a matter of fact. And almost all the former colonies as well. The same happened to other great empires.
And by the way: the forming of empire was mainly done through war. The German unification of 1871 was done under Prussian leadership and supremacy. Aside of the fact that there was a movement for national union as well and the idea was very popular. There isn´t such a thing about Europe, though. And not to slightest degree for the world.
Politics is still organized on a national level. The same is the case with the public attention span which is mainly focused on national issues.
The EU is a muti-national organisation. You are right with it in one point. It needs to be decided what modell the EU should follow - or rather how the combination of models should look like. The British modell: An union of nations and not a super-state, inter-governmental cooperation and involvement of national parliaments and unanimity principle for defense, foreign and tax policy (those three require unanity according to the draft constituition).
The French model: A more centralized union, though still with a strong position of the national governments.
The German model: A federal Europe with national governments hand some power to the EU but some to their regions. Subsidiary principle garanteed: only responsible of the higher level if the lower level can´t deal with an issue.
The proposed new voting procedure in the council of ministers (the so called double majority (majority of states and population - Franco-German proposal was 50% of the states, who represent 60% of the people - passed was as compromise 55% of the states who represent 65% of the population) was mainly a german idea, though.
It reflects the federal and duel character of the EU: an union of states and of people. But it is never going to be a super state - which would after all mean: no national states any more. It is going to remain both.
And by the way: since when is Britain a part of Europe???? You are not the continent - aren´t you?