# France rejected the European Union Constitution



## MiamiAG (Jan 13, 2004)

Well, France rejected the constitution (55% saying "No") and sent the whole process back to the drawing board. I've heard the reasoning was that the French population was afraid of losing their social welfare system.

The way I see it at the moment, this effectively shoots the EU concept in the foot and will significantly delay the EU's growth to be a true super power in the world. 

What do you think of this? What does this mean to the US?


----------



## John P. (Nov 24, 2004)

I think this could easily become a French-bashing thread, which would be aweful. 

That said, I don't think most Americans would want to compromise perceived national sovereignity/pride, either.


----------



## MiamiAG (Jan 13, 2004)

Thanks for your thoughts John. However, I didn't mean to imply this was a French bashing thread. Nor did I want to questions any country's right to sovereignty. There are several other countries that were set to veto the constitution as well.

I don't see this as a sovereignty issue as France is already a member of the EU. Or, does France just view the EU just like a large trading block?


----------



## HeyPK (Jan 23, 2004)

I think that France agrees with many of the goals of the European Union. France will not be a big problem. China is rapidly becoming a major economic power to be dealt with. The United States is pretty scary right now, declaring its "right" to invade other countries if it wants to, torturing prisoners, threatening to start up nuclear testing, threatening to place weapons of mass destruction in space.


----------



## Laith (Sep 4, 2004)

The 55% of "NO" voters in France were not voting on the new European Constitution. They were not answering the question that was on the ballot!

They turned it into a vote of no confidence in the current government.

Several polls were taken today to try to find out why so many voted "no". The majority answer was that they were sick and tired of the current government! :???: 

No, it doesn't have to make sense... :razz: 

The parties pushing for a "yes" vote did a horrible job clearly explaining to the population what the whole thing was about. The opposition took this as a perfect opportunity to trash the current government.


----------



## Paul Higashikawa (Mar 18, 2004)

HeyPK said:


> I think that France agrees with many of the goals of the European Union. France will not be a big problem. China is rapidly becoming a major economic power to be dealt with. The United States is pretty scary right now, declaring its "right" to invade other countries if it wants to, torturing prisoners, threatening to start up nuclear testing, threatening to place weapons of mass destruction in space.


Which brings up the question of: What is the definition of an empire?

Is USA the empire of the 21 Century? Using whatever reasons it deems necessary to 'police' other nations for the sake of 'freedom' and 'humanity'? I think this would also be a good topic to talk about.


----------



## Glock Shooter (May 20, 2005)

HeyPK said:


> The United States is pretty scary right now, declaring its "right" to invade other countries if it wants to, torturing prisoners, threatening to start up nuclear testing, threatening to place weapons of mass destruction in space.


Don't you mean .... The United States is finally heading in the right direction now, we're no longer ignoring countries and tyrants that are threatening us with harm, we've liberated greater than 55 Million people (mostly Muslim), captured and detained over 68,000 terrorists intent on destroying our nation and its friends, stopped enabling North Korea and Iran's ambitions to create nuclear weapons to threaten the world with, and started creating systems to defend our nation and our friends from nuclear missle attack.

The work needs to be continued. We now got to focus on the Senate and eliminate those Senators who disregard the Constitution .... starting with the Nit-Wit 7 Republicans and moving onto Hillary,Shumer, Boxer and Finestine


----------



## MiamiAG (Jan 13, 2004)

Folks,

We are getting WAY off target here. This is not a country bashing thread.

I wanted to get a feeling for what the world (our members) thinks about the future of the European Union. Will it succeed? Should it? Good intentions, but bad implementation? That sort of thing.


----------



## Phil Edwards (Jan 22, 2004)

I think that an organization along the lines of the EU is vital to Europe's success as a whole. The world is becoming so interdependent economically that the relatively small, area wise, European countries need to find some way to pool resources for their mutual benefit. Personally, I think it's a great concept, though I have little first-hand knowledge of the practical implementations of it. NAFTA was a good idea, but it didn't work out too well. 

Europe once had an overarching leadership outside of the states' rulers and it did amazing things to keep Europe together in some really hard times. If the member states can come up with a constitution that is acceptable by the majority of the people and if national sovereignty isn't compromised too much I think it's a great idea.


----------



## MiamiAG (Jan 13, 2004)

Phil,

Thanks. Personally, I feel the same way.

It is a difficult challenge. It is much harder to get something like this done today.


----------



## HeyPK (Jan 23, 2004)

I thought I heard that Belgum was also not likely to approve the constitution, and that the EU leaders were thinking of rewriting the constitution to make it more acceptable. I'm sure that the EU will last and complete its consolidation business. Just about all the countries know that they have to be part of EU or they will have no clout when the demand for fossel fuels and other resources gets worse and the globalization of the economy progresses.


----------



## Laith (Sep 4, 2004)

I think the majority of Europeans are for a strong Europe and realize that the European Union has many more advantages for them than disadvantages.

There is a lot of grumbling about the incompetency of the "centralized" apparatus in Brussels and other issues but what citizen of any country doesn't grumble about the bureaucracy?

As I mentioned in my earlier post re France, most French are for the EU. As are the Dutch even if they also vote against the new constitution in their vote tomorrow.

But everyone needs to keep in mind the sheer mind-boggling difficulty in doing what the Europeans are trying to do. It is difficult enough trying to make a coherent whole out of a mixture of people who speak the same language and have the same culture.

Now imagine trying to unify and give common direction to a mass of 380 million people with vastly different languages and cultures, even though they are all western. English is rapidly becoming the common language because of the sheer difficulty of trying to deal with simultaneous translations and many multiples of documents in every language! Check out the home page at http://europa.eu.int : twenty language choices! Switzerland is difficult enough with four official languages.

Not to mention all the nationalistic feelings. Imagine if all the countries in North and South America decided to ditch their individual currencies and all have the same. And that would only be dealing with (I'm simplifying here) three major languages, or four if you include French Quebec...

But its frustrating to see Europe constantly fumbling around and not being able to have one voice and one direction, especially when it comes to foreign policy.


----------



## Glock Shooter (May 20, 2005)

The Rights portion of their Constitution can be found here:

http://www.unizar.es/euroconstitucion/library/constitution_29.10.04/part_II_EN.pdf

Its interesting when you compare it to our (US) Bill of Rights and Constitution.

Our Bill of Rights limits what Government can do to us ..... Congress shall make no laws ... the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed ... The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

The EU version is a list of demands of the people ... Everyone has the right of freedom of expression ..... Everyone has the right to education .... Everyone has the right to a free placement service ... Everyone has the right to access preventative health care

I notice there is no right of self defense ("Everyone has the right to life", which I take to mean the Rapist and Murderer have rights also) nor is gun ownership allowed (no surprise there).

We, in the US, have seen how our very clearly written rights are eroded by Judicial fiat and tyrany. I can't imagine how whacky these statements of rights will be twisted to advance an anti-liberty agenda.


----------



## gnatster (Mar 6, 2004)

The US Constitution and supporting documents are the only ones in the known world where the citizens grant rights to the govt, all others state the rights govt give to the people. However acts like the ill thought Patriot Act and the new actions the DOJ wants to have added chip away more and more at individual rights. Ever notice how hard is to get back what is taken away. 

I know the thread is to be on EU and how the French no vote may effect the new Europe and now I read Dutch voters overwhelmingly rejected the European Union constitution. I think overall people want to be free to run their lives, free to make idiots of themselves and not have govt rammed down their throats. Govt should be unobtrusive and small, not the sprawling bureaucratic behemoths they have become.


----------



## Glock Shooter (May 20, 2005)

I don't understand why Europe needs a Consitution. It seems to me they have it very well setup now, a common currency, freedom to work in other countries, etc. Why are they trying to be one country? This would be like New York and Mississippi joining together. It doesn't work for the benefit of either. There isn't enough in common. 

I don't believe that the vote was a no-confidence vote in Oil For Food, Axis of the bribed Chirac. After reading the Constitution, I'm thinking its a vote against Socialism.


----------

