Friday, May 27, 2005
Why the Europhiles Are Voting "No" to the EU.
France may reject the European Constitution in the next few days, but this may not be a rejection of a united European, but rather the rejection of a specific document that may Europhiles find offensive.
All of this reminds me of the collapse of the Charlottetown Accord here in Canada. It was in essence a new constitution for Canada, and all the politicians argeed that this was "Good" for Canada. They then decided to call a referendum to get the support of all Canadians.
I was opposed, and in my first political act as an adult I voted no to the accord. I agreed with most of it, but the articles for amending the constitution became very onerous. We would have been stuck with this document and it had a lot of flaws.
In the end most Canadians told the politicians to fuck off, and the accord died.
The same thing is happening in the EU now. The process has gone too quickly and with too little input from the people, and in France and the Netherlands the Eurocrats are going to be told to fuck off. This is probably a good thing; another attempt, a less ambitious attempt, with be made to create a new constitution and it will succeed.
Jax
All say that they feel themselves vaguely to be Europeans, not just French. All are students in engineering at a prestigious institute in Toulouse - a booming, cosmopolitan city, heavily dependent on trade with Spain and Italy, and the European Airbus.
Two will vote against the European Union constitution on Sunday. One is torn between support for the idea of a united Europe and hatred of the language in the text. The fourth will vote "yes", but with a heavy heart.
Alexandre, Sylvain, Baptiste and Nicolas, aged 19 or 20, are members of an informal debating club at the Institut National des Sciences Appliquées in the suburbs of Toulouse. They have agreed to meet me to explain why - against all expectations and past voting patterns - young people in France, aged 18-25, plan to vote crushingly against the EU treaty. . .
Sylvain Girssner - long hair, black sweat-shirt and dark glasses, a definite "non" - said: "I have been shocked by some of the language in the treaty. Money, free trade, profits and unrestricted competition are the only values ... This treaty simply does not represent my view of the world."
Alexandre Larribeau, short-haired, blue-shirt, a half-Spanish Parisian, and another definite "non" said: "OK, most of the language about free markets and competition has been in all the previous European treaties. But no one asked us about the previous treaties ... We are looking at the language now for the first time and seeing what the EU is all about and we don't like it. And we don't like the idea that this constitution could freeze things like that for 80 years."
All are in favour of some form of European Union, maybe even more federalist than the present EU. Asked what their "alternative Europe" would do, if it did not promote trade, they say: "A much more ambitious, common environment policy, Europe-wide harmonisation of social guarantees and a better deal for the developing world."
This is not the selfish, nationalist, left of most French trades unions, terrified of an invasion of Polish plumbers. It is not the workerist left of the Communists or the miserabalist-ideological extreme left. It is a more humanist, softer, vaguely anarchist, pro-Third World left, influenced heavily by the anti-globalist movement. It is reminiscent of the idealist-hedonist left of my own student days in the early 1970s. (Link)
All of this reminds me of the collapse of the Charlottetown Accord here in Canada. It was in essence a new constitution for Canada, and all the politicians argeed that this was "Good" for Canada. They then decided to call a referendum to get the support of all Canadians.
I was opposed, and in my first political act as an adult I voted no to the accord. I agreed with most of it, but the articles for amending the constitution became very onerous. We would have been stuck with this document and it had a lot of flaws.
In the end most Canadians told the politicians to fuck off, and the accord died.
The same thing is happening in the EU now. The process has gone too quickly and with too little input from the people, and in France and the Netherlands the Eurocrats are going to be told to fuck off. This is probably a good thing; another attempt, a less ambitious attempt, with be made to create a new constitution and it will succeed.
Jax
All say that they feel themselves vaguely to be Europeans, not just French. All are students in engineering at a prestigious institute in Toulouse - a booming, cosmopolitan city, heavily dependent on trade with Spain and Italy, and the European Airbus.
Two will vote against the European Union constitution on Sunday. One is torn between support for the idea of a united Europe and hatred of the language in the text. The fourth will vote "yes", but with a heavy heart.
Alexandre, Sylvain, Baptiste and Nicolas, aged 19 or 20, are members of an informal debating club at the Institut National des Sciences Appliquées in the suburbs of Toulouse. They have agreed to meet me to explain why - against all expectations and past voting patterns - young people in France, aged 18-25, plan to vote crushingly against the EU treaty. . .
Sylvain Girssner - long hair, black sweat-shirt and dark glasses, a definite "non" - said: "I have been shocked by some of the language in the treaty. Money, free trade, profits and unrestricted competition are the only values ... This treaty simply does not represent my view of the world."
Alexandre Larribeau, short-haired, blue-shirt, a half-Spanish Parisian, and another definite "non" said: "OK, most of the language about free markets and competition has been in all the previous European treaties. But no one asked us about the previous treaties ... We are looking at the language now for the first time and seeing what the EU is all about and we don't like it. And we don't like the idea that this constitution could freeze things like that for 80 years."
All are in favour of some form of European Union, maybe even more federalist than the present EU. Asked what their "alternative Europe" would do, if it did not promote trade, they say: "A much more ambitious, common environment policy, Europe-wide harmonisation of social guarantees and a better deal for the developing world."
This is not the selfish, nationalist, left of most French trades unions, terrified of an invasion of Polish plumbers. It is not the workerist left of the Communists or the miserabalist-ideological extreme left. It is a more humanist, softer, vaguely anarchist, pro-Third World left, influenced heavily by the anti-globalist movement. It is reminiscent of the idealist-hedonist left of my own student days in the early 1970s. (Link)
