Reply
Sun 25 Jan, 2004 03:09 pm
Is the european parliament answerable to the electorate? Nope. Unlike the British parliament where a vote of no confidence will see out the incumbents there is simply no mechanism for a similar move in the EU.
Referenda, democratic? Not a bit of it. If a member state votes, in a referendum against the wishes of the EU, that is not the end of it. Ireland voted against the Nice treaty (had it voted FOR the treaty that would have been an end to it) instead we had to witness the sickening spectacle of Prodi scuttling over to Ireland the day after the NO vote to explain to the Irish just what it was they had done wrong. Since when, in a democracy is a soveriegn nation obliged to suffer a lecture from an unelected, unanswerable civil servant. But does anyone raise so much as an eyebrow? Not much, we are slowly being indoctrinated with the notion that the (wholly unelected)Comission is where the power is. Denmark voted against acceptance of the single currency....all very democratic.....oh no, but what's this.....sorry guys we're going to have another referendum cos you got it wrong last time.
Appoinments of power.
When the first president of the European Central Bank was being decided and the majority came down on the side of Wim Duisenberg, the French refused to accept the appointment unless his successor was a Frenchman. They didn't even have a candidate at that time, all they were interested in was that fact that he/she be French? This has what to do with democracy? Nothing, just one nation looking after it's OWN interests over and above the collective interest. So when Wim Duisenberg finally went we did not get the BEST candidate for the job, we just get someone who happens to be French (OK, the two things aren't necessarily mutually exclusive but it sure as hells limits the options) Moreover, given the French insistence on this they were hardly likely to appoint a civil servant they couldn't manipulate....so tells us M. Trichet just how was it you managed to extricate yourself from the endless tribulations surrounding the book cooking to hide losses of $31 billion? Innocent? Favours from people in high places? The evidence did seem compelling but I'm sure it's all very much above board.
The EU is about as democratic as a lottery win
Despite the Wilsonian great expectations heaped upon the EU it increasingly appears a union designed mainly to advance the views and expectations of a select few core European states. Those in disagreement are then subjected to lectures or instructions pointing out the error of their ways.
It seems fine when a few core states break the economic stability pact 3 years running. However, when some former members of the Warsaw Pact with EU aspirations voice their opinions as to their concerns about Iraq they are admonished as children being heard when only being seen is required.
I read an interesting article in the Economist about a month ago that compared the founding ideologies of the U.S. vs. the EU. The crux was that the U.S.'s democracy was founded on the premise that the evolution of the federal government was a forgone conclusion and that its legitimacy flowed from the governed.
In contrast the EU seems to obtain its legitimacy from "Ultimate Truths" in the style of The Enlightenment. But, unfortunately, these truths, like those old time religious tenets, can only be interpreted by a select few and the Martin Luthers of Eastern European and Danish origin need not apply. However, given the past history of Germany and France one does wonder somewhat about their leadership credentials.
Another thought is that the common enemy policy that held the early American colonies worked also in post WWII keeping the western alliance members from squabbling with each other. This common threat, the U.S.S.R, no longer exists and this now removes the brake on international disputes allowing the present situation. Further, the French attempt, at U.S. expense, at balance of power politics failed simply because the concept only works when there is a real world balance of power.
Where the patricians of the American colonies recognized the power of the central government flowed from the people the governments of core European states have put their trust in the hope its patricians will always possess the wisdom of what is right for the people so governed. I am not impressed with this headlong rush into oligarchy. We have seen this before but will it really be better if the select few speak different native languages?
Obviously, those nations that can will go their separate ways. For now, perhaps, these nations should form healthy economic pacts (Common Market) that can be enjoyed by their members. Those agreements striving "towards a more perfect union" may come but slowly at first and then only step by step.
JM
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace