NationStates Jolt Archive

I just had a big ass discussion about the pros and cons of the European Constitution.

What do you think about it?

It promotes a sense of european unity so I'm all for it, that said it won't change very much and I'm slightly worried that in the long run it may slow down the process of european unification as nations seek to follow the guidelines of the constitiution to the letter even when the document is out of date.

Nay!

Nay!
Care to elaborate?

I think it is an important step for all European countries. Even though there's aa lot of resistance on a national level, I think the European constitution will become reality. Sooner or later...

I think it is an important step for all European countries. Even though there's aa lot of resistance on a national level, I think the European constitution will become reality. Sooner or later...
Well yes, because if it's rejected as it is there will be a new altered constitution proposal

Europes Constitusion is better than here. at least they have Euros

Care to elaborate?
If you insist:
I'm a big advocate of national sovereignty. A sovereign nation can create laws that would best run itself; and as a rule of principle, I'm opposed to any sort of international law that would be imposed over my country. This is b/c I, as an individual citizen, have less of a say in internatinoal law than I do in natn'l law.

Nay

But this is because I am opposed to codified constitutions in general. They are too slow to adjust to the realities of the world, and have no more force than an uncodified one. The EU effectrively has a constitution already in the treaty of Rome, the Maastricht treaty and the set of European laws that already exist, in addition to the laws and constitutions of its member states. What real purpose does this codification serve?

I'm strongly opposed to the constitution as it will give increased powers to the unelected commission and will enforce neoliberal economic policies and the privatisation of public services on the people of Europe.

Undecided - I need to actually read the Constitution before I can make an opinion on it;

One of the things on my "list to do" for the Summer holidays. :)

Me thinks the EU constitution is a good idea in general :cool:
But in the current form it is just not crafted good enough :mad:
There are to many weak statements and gives the feeling civil rights are cut down in favor for some corporation interests :headbang:
Got some good lobbyists there I guess :eek:
So me is a nay, and I think in France it'll be a NON. So we'll have to rethink the whole Union :D
But thats just me...

I have a confession to make: I have actually read the thing... and yes, it's dull...

but, there's nothing particularly revolutionary in it. I actually though it was quite a sensible document that brings clarity to the competences of the member-states and the EU institutions.

So, had I vote, I'd vote yes. However, the Riksdag will be decided our position (i.e. it will vote yes, as the vast majority of the parties support it). We don't get a referendum, despite public opinion largely being for one.

Nay

But this is because I am opposed to codified constitutions in general. They are too slow to adjust to the realities of the world, and have no more force than an uncodified one. The EU effectrively has a constitution already in the treaty of Rome, the Maastricht treaty and the set of European laws that already exist, in addition to the laws and constitutions of its member states. What real purpose does this codification serve?

I agree. I disagree with constitutions as they become outdated, open to widespread mistranslation, deliberate or otherwise, and people hold to them like they are a sacred document. If European unity is an inevitable reality, then a constitution is un-necessary and... detrimental to the process.

Nay! A piece of neo-liberal shit.