View Full Version : French reject EU constitution
Firebeef
05-31-2005, 08:00
The French have pretty much said "Non" to the EU and Chirac, and "oui" to maintaining their cushy, 38 hour work weeks, holidays (paid) up the ying-yang and every social net and cushion imaginable....absoloutley non-sustainable for their children. Whats' everyones take on the future of the EU?
Do I hear Taps in the Belleau woods??? maybe Amazing Grace on Bag pipes on a fog shrouded european morning??
The French are becoming charicatures of themselves, over-the-top distortions of their own contrariness. The day of the vote was supposed to be the biggest news day in France this year. So what happened? The newspaper unions planned a strike and people had to go far out of their way to find a paper. Typical. :rolleyes:
The French have pretty much said "Non" to the EU and Chirac (le Bulldozer") and yes to maintaining their cushy, 38 hour work weeks, holidays (paid) up the ying-yang and every social net and cushion imaginable....absoloutley non-sustainable for their children. Whats' everyones take on the future of the EU?
Do I hear Taps?? maybe Amazing Grace on Bag pipes in the distance??
I'm sure you won't hear a victory song for France......I don't think they have one do they? :D
I know that most of Europe is pissed because the Euro slipped one percent against the US dollar. Makes life a little difficult for families that are a little less fortunate. If they continue down this road I think it just may dissolve the union.
We shall see.
Airbornelawyer
05-31-2005, 09:02
The French have pretty much said "Non" to the EU and Chirac, and "oui" to maintaining their cushy, 38 hour work weeks, holidays (paid) up the ying-yang and every social net and cushion imaginable....absoloutley non-sustainable for their children. Whats' everyones take on the future of the EU?It is 35 hours.
See Loi no 98-461 du 13 juin 1998 d'orientation et d'incitation relative à la réduction du temps de travail (http://www.35h.travail.gouv.fr/docs_refs/loi/loi98461.htm), as amended by Loi n° 2000-37 du 19/01/2000 relative à la réduction négociée du temps de travail (http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/citoyen/jorf_nor.ow?numjo=MESX9900090L) and Loi n° 2003-47 du 17 janvier 2003 relative aux salaires, au temps de travail et au développement de l'emploi (http://www.35h.travail.gouv.fr/docs_refs/loi/Loi%20du%2017%20janvier%202003.rtf)
Chirac's appointment of Dominique de Villepin, a consumately foppish and anti-American bureaucrat who has never stood for election, as his new Prime Minister, rather than Nicholas Sarkozy, the Rudy Guiliani of France, may be seen as an indication that as far as Chirac is concerned, it is still business as usual and the only problem is that the French people simply failed to properly do as they were told by their betters.
Assuming a Dutch nee tomorrow to join the French non, I expect the same reaction from Dutch political leaders, given that that is essentially what they have already been saying.
Nine other EU countries already approved the constitution by virtue of simply avoiding a vote and passing it in their parliaments. Britain was planning on doing the same thing, but the word is if the Dutch reject it, the British government will withdraw the constitution from parliamentary consideration.
I expect there will be some debate over whether to rethink how they are going about creating this supposed political entity called "Europe" or whether to simply tinker with the words enough to push the constitution through again. And I suspect they will simply go with the latter. It may become an issue in German elections expected in September, in which case we may see how strong skepticism about "Europe" is there as well.
I was in Europe about a month ago and nobody I talked to (in France, Germany, and UK) understood what the EU constitution really was or what it would do for/to them. Most of them did not care.
This is a reality call for the politicians of Europe who has been acting like everyone is on the bandwagon and heading for the future. In their mind, the minor countries (Denmark, Sweden, Netherlands, etc) who might oppose these steps forward should be revoted till they get it right, perhaps even understand the greatness of the project.
The problem is that Europe is not united. The US might be bipolarized, but Europe is shattered glass that a cyclops is trying to melt together. The pieces looks about the same, pointing more and less in the same directions - though still not a proper fit.
The EU is proud of what it has done, including it's enlargment. At the same time people are perplexed at the muslim contingent in Europe - it should be accepted, although in some cases it scares people and threatens the identities of people in European countries.
Here, the newly joined members are patted on the back, a pride of the possibilities of the EU. The non-war basis being the reason for the creation of the original coal and steel union and various other deals, a mutation of it reappears, that we are doing the world a great service.
Then comes the fright of losing jobs. Those Polish are going to lower the wages, labor is going to be stolen by those dreadful, working people. Of course, that revitalization is what Europe needs. Nevermind, then people get scared of social migration, that others will benefit of the countries with higher levels of social support.
Then comes the primary immigration issues, of thought of how to handle new comers, where they'll settle, for some a fear of lowering state social support - to avoid the immigrants, etc etc... a mess.
Europeans crave to have something to say on the world scene. For some, this means as a counter weight to the USA. To others, it is a wish to stand on solid ground, to be of importance, make a better world, whatever. In the end, we want benefits of the EU and if the deteriorating situation is noticed without pissing everybody off, a support to unite might materialize.
To cut it short, because one can go on and on about rifts and uniting factors ad nauseum, this constitution ain't goin' nowhere unless the People fall asleep.
How many call themselves Europeans, if not foremost, then ever? Seldom, if ever.
How many do you think trust what politicians say with money signs rolling in their eyes when talking about this wonderful constitution running at far over 200 pages in length? Could it be a little show stopper that it's pretty hard to get an overview even if one came up with the great idea of reading 200 pages of legal mumbo jumbo?
Then you think of the current bureaucracy, and you frown.
The Brits are afraid that they will be forced to quit work, while the Belgiumnautes, Francophones and Deutche folke don't want to move in the other direction. All the while people feel that this EU thing is so far away, a ploy that might concern them, but over which they have no or very little power. In the case that somebody actually gives a sh... dedicate it a thought, it is feared that it will become an untouchable federal government.
And again it goes on and on...
Three things that I think might happen:
1. The EU goes introverted and implodes under it's own weight. This would happen after the governments through various means try to get the constitution through over and over again. What actually would happen after this, is open to wild speculation.
2. Reform takes place in incremental steps. It is doubtful if the politicians can figure out how to do this right and get the population on board. It would probably be misguided and rushed. A possible way for a start of this is a common defense. A big problem remains the limitations and legal ramifications of reforming the EU.
3. The rifts come in focus and those with a common idea of how to solve them and how they want the union to act in the world, create united leaderships in new unions (2?) that would have open markets between eachother, and work from the ground up to get the nations support.
I think both one and two might be tried. For number three to happen, discussions would have to start soon to get closer together.
A Telegraph article I just found - after writing the above. (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml;sessionid=FN1INL4OTNPRVQFIQMGSM5OAVCBQW JVC?xml=/opinion/2005/05/31/do3102.xml&sSheet=/opinion/2005/05/31/ixopinion.html) It basically says the same thing, but puts it more bashingly.
Peregrino
05-31-2005, 14:57
A Telegraph article I just found - after writing the above. (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml;sessionid=FN1INL4OTNPRVQFIQMGSM5OAVCBQW JVC?xml=/opinion/2005/05/31/do3102.xml&sSheet=/opinion/2005/05/31/ixopinion.html) It basically says the same thing, but puts it more bashingly.
Loved the article. Talk about stoking the fires. Got to love what multi-culturalism, political correctness, socialism, and Balkanization has done to Europe. The idea of a "United Europe" is ludicrous. Looking at the article in a broader perspective reminds me of things that need saying about our own internal politics. Especially every time the "Annointed by God", Europhile, self-appointed, liberal elite wants to dictate to the unwashed masses because "we know best" or "it's for your own good". Unfortunately, our Leftists insist on steadfastly ignoring the rising stench of the gangrenous wound Socialism has inflicted on the European psyche (and economy). They refuse to acknowledge that Communism has failed and Socialism is rapidly dragging Europe down the commode overcome by the burgeoning costs of maintaining a dependent class that is quickly outnumbering the producers. Meanwhile they continue to insist that the only reason Socialism hasn't worked is because it hasn't been tried here, by them.
Also makes me appreciate the genius of our Founding Fathers! There's a lot to be said for a Constitution that can be hand-written on one large sheet of parchment. One that promotes the revolutionary idea of a limited government, responsible to the people. One that has lasted more than 200 years (might be getting a little tattered but it still works pretty much as the Founding Fathers intended). Hell - the average French Constitution has a probable lifespan of less than 30 years. What hope does that give Europe for any continuity? Lets not forget the ideal, as envisaged by our imigrant forebearers, of a melting pot where the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. (Though sadly, that is now fallen far from favor in the pursuit of "cultural diversity", self-actualization, etc. - see European problems previously mentioned.) Something else to be taken back from the multi-culturalists. Brings to mind the Chinese parable of the Emperor who tests his sons by giving them a bundle of sticks, commanding them to break it. They all try and fail. He calls them together, unwraps the bundle, and breaks each stick individually thereby demonstrating to them the strength found in unity and the weakness inherent in solitude. (And the SF principle of an open minded approach to problem solving!)
All this free thinking just warms the cockles of my heart every time some leftist curses me as a "Conservative". Just my .02 - Peregrino
Roguish Lawyer
05-31-2005, 18:37
Also makes me appreciate the genius of our Founding Fathers! There's a lot to be said for a Constitution that can be hand-written on one large sheet of parchment. One that promotes the revolutionary idea of a limited government, responsible to the people. One that has lasted more than 200 years (might be getting a little tattered but it still works pretty much as the Founding Fathers intended). Hell - the average French Constitution has a probable lifespan of less than 30 years. What hope does that give Europe for any continuity? Lets not forget the ideal, as envisaged by our imigrant forebearers, of a melting pot where the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. (Though sadly, that is now fallen far from favor in the pursuit of "cultural diversity", self-actualization, etc. - see European problems previously mentioned.) Something else to be taken back from the multi-culturalists.
All this free thinking just warms the cockles of my heart every time some leftist curses me as a "Conservative". Just my .02 - Peregrino
For you, Peregrino:
Airbornelawyer
05-31-2005, 19:26
Hell - the average French Constitution has a probable lifespan of less than 30 years. Thirty years would be unusually above average.
The only French constitution to last that long is the current one for the Fifth Republic, adopted on 4 October 1958. The Third Republic, which actually lasted the longest of any French republic (1871-1940), did not have a formal constitution, but was governed by a series of constitutional laws (lois constitutionnelles) adopted between 1871 and 1875.
During the revolutionary period and Napoléon Bonaparte's rise to power, no less than six constitutions were adopted (in 1791, 1793, 1795, 1799, 1802 and 1804). With the restoration in 1814, a new royal charter replaced the last imperial constitution, but after Napoleon's return from Elba, this was replaced by yet a new imperial constitution (22 April 1815).
After Napoleon's second defeat, the Royal Charter of 1814 was re-adopted, but it was replaced by a new Charter in 1830 which tried to make for a more limited constitutional monarchy.
This only lasted until the liberal revolutions of 1848, which saw the founding of the Second Republic with a new republican constitution. Unfortunately, the French promptly elected as their new republican president Charles Louis Napoléon Bonaparte. In 1851 he decided liberalism had run its course, and had a new constitution adopted on 14 January 1852 essentially giving him dictatorial powers. The first amendment to that constitution came in November 1852: "La dignité impériale est rétablie. Louis Napoléon Bonaparte est Empereur des Français, sous le nom de Napoléon III" ("The imperial dignity is reestablished. Louis Napoléon Bonaparte is Emperor of the French, under the name of Napoléon III.").
A series of more liberal reforms weakened the imperial power in the late 1860s, but Napoléon III managed to win a referendum on his empire in May 1870, and yet another constitution was adopted that month. A few months later, Napoléon III lost the Battle of Sedan and his empire.
As noted above, the Third Republic acted without a formal constitution. Many of its lois constitutionnelles were abrogated in June 1940 by the Vichy regime. A series of actes constitutionnelles were enacted between 1940 and 1942, but a projected constitution in 1944 was mooted by events. Finally, the Fourth Republic's constitution of 27 October 1946 lasted just over a decade.
A fairly comprehensive collection of these constitutions may be found here (http://mjp.univ-perp.fr/france/france.htm).
The French have pretty much said "Non" to the EU and Chirac, and "oui" to maintaining their cushy, 38 hour work weeks, holidays (paid) up the ying-yang and every social net and cushion imaginable....absoloutley non-sustainable for their children. Whats' everyones take on the future of the EU?
Do I hear Taps in the Belleau woods??? maybe Amazing Grace on Bag pipes on a fog shrouded european morning??France leaving the EU will have the same catastrophic effect that was felt when France left NATO in '64...
Airbornelawyer
05-31-2005, 20:06
For you, Peregrino:
For you both:
Roguish Lawyer
05-31-2005, 20:17
For you both:
That was much better than mine.
Thank you. :D
Peregrino
05-31-2005, 23:03
I should know better than to stir up a couple lawyers. :D As for the T-shirts - I'll aspire to the first and admire the second. RL - As usual, your scholarship is impeccable. I was trying to be generous with the 30 year comment. I knew it was bad, I'd forgotten how bad. (My own scholarship is somewhat more haphazard than yours.) Peregrino
K. I'm all PC'd out now, need a beer. However, Diversity CAN be a good thing.
Roguish Lawyer
06-02-2005, 01:49
K. I'm all PC'd out now, need a beer. However, Diversity CAN be a good thing.
I have that shirt, but it's white. :lifter
LOL RL. Now I have to get one.
Don'tcha just love messing with the lib public?
Seeing as how you are in CA.......... and wearing that shirt, good thing you are a Lawyer :D