Armed EU Troops Storm Around EU Parliament Waving EU Flags

(edited OP to include this statement as a clarifier.)

The EU is progressing in exactly the same manner as the United States progressed into a full sovereign country.

At the founding of the US, it was not entirely clear if the US would hold together as a Nation Sate. The states viewed themselves as sovereign entities. The US federal government was created as a compact between states to ensure mutual protection and free trade agreements between themselves.

In fact the formation of the EU and the US is identical in every aspect, with the exception being that the people running the EU are not beholden to the sovereign citizens of the Nation States in any way.

If you like what the US has become, then you should support the EU.

If you dislike the warmongering fascist State the US has become, then you should oppose the EU.



[edit on 30-8-2010 by mnemeth1]

reply to post by mnemeth1


I prefer to look at it like this; with facit in hand, we know not to make the same "mistake" the US made. In other words, we can have an EU - and as long as we keep the way the US progressed in mind when the European Union develop, we can avoid that happening to the EU.

That's just my opinion, though. Whether or not it'll happen is anyone's guess.

[edit on 30-8-2010 by David_Reale]

Originally posted by David_Reale
reply to post by mnemeth1

 

I prefer to look at it like this; with facit in hand, we know not to make the same "mistake" the US made. In other words, we can have an EU - and as long as we keep the way the US progressed in mind when the European Union develop, we can avoid that happening to the EU.

That's just my opinion, though. Whether or not it'll happen is anyone's guess.

[edit on 30-8-2010 by David_Reale]

You may know all sorts of things.

Doesn't matter since the EU doesn't answer to you.

reply to post by mnemeth1


No, you're right. It doesn't answer to me. It answers to the people of Europe. And if it doesn't, it's our duty to make it answer to us. We're all living in democracies in this beautiful continent of Europe. It's our responsibility to decide what happens to her.

I'll say it again; if the majority of Europeans don't want the EU, then it doesn't matter what I want. We can't have it. However, if the majority of Europeans does want EU to exist, then that's what we're going to have. And if we get an EU against the will of the majority, then that's an undemocratic EU - and I don't support that kind of thing.

Right now, in my opinion, the best thing to do is; 1) Vote for what you believe is best for Europe, in the elections in your country, AND, the European Parliament, and 2) demand from the people you elect, that the EU machinery be picked clean of the corrupt flies that feast on it.

If you want out of the EU, that's the best way to proceed.

If you want the European Union to become a single state, that's the best way to proceed.

It's as simple as that. Well, maybe not, but in my eyes, it is.

[edit on 30-8-2010 by David_Reale]

reply to post by David_Reale


You can see how well that worked out for the US.

Hence, if you like what the US has become, you should support the EU.

The 20th century has made it clear that centralizing power leads to death, not peace.

Every dictator that has ever come to power has been against states rights because a diffuse power structure makes tyranny extremely difficult.



[edit on 30-8-2010 by mnemeth1]

reply to post by mnemeth1


Then (assuming you're European) you should vote against more integration by your country into the EU. And, it would be wise, to vote people likeminded to you into the European Parliament, where they can help decentralize power from the European Union, and put it back into the government of your country.

Originally posted by David_Reake

I didn't say I want a United States of Europe. I said I wanted a European Union, a union made up of the nations of Europe as a strong affiliation of sovereign nations - strong and tight-knit enough to be seen, from the outside, as one nation with one voice - but from the inside, ruled by its sovereign member nations.

How Lovely! What you want is clearly very lovely!!!

Most people want us to end all wars, forget nationalistic labels, or political labels (for that matter) as we come together in the collective interests of mankind.

I (like many) love how communism promised to expand and (ultimately) end all national boundaries. To remove political “labels” of left or “right” by replacing it with a government of experts-professional advisers (but “bureaucrat” is what they turned out to be!!!)
How it promised to rid society of labels of upper or lower class, and replace it with a “earnt it” or “earnt it” not class. To promise everyone an equral wage based upon their ability, and useful to a society geared towards the collective interests of mankind.

But this a Utopia.
Time and again it’s left leaning, well meaning ideas, have proven disastrous.

WHY…
Collectivisation is not good wherever it materialises. We can see this in capitalism, where here all its called is a monopoly.
A monopoly should be more efficient because you don’t waste time e.g. marketing, when you own the production. So one would think government pricing controls could ensure that corporations provided goods cheaper and more efficiently than before.
In practice you get a company like Enron, full of corruption (in the passage of time) guilty of under investment (for short term gain) and prone to going bankcrupt-unstable in spectacular fashion.

And capitalism is the most evolutionary natural, successful and well tried, system mankind has utilised.

Collectivisation is either worse in politics. An extreme is those countries who have 100% dictatorship. A compromise, with this extreme is the EU.
You see with the European Union how whilst before Britain EU, France, Germany could elect opposite (and therefore ideologically-pragmatically competing governments, under the EU its just one (an already very over-burdened, gloated, and inefficient pig).

I would rather the French could elect their Socialists, the British our Conservatives, and the Germans they’re strong leader. All ideas should be as much to people liking as possible, so that they can as different as possible. That way every political side can pinch (or learn from) each others experiences, whilst a “local” (you can actually influence) plays kingmaker at the ballot box.

One Big Exception…
The only time we need is collectivisation is to prevent trade-war, and in the interests of war. Because (just like with a “Command Economy”) war is the only time collectivisation makes sense. (Or at least according to the majority of human history; so far).

People like me wouldn’t be calling the EU flawed, if what we had so far (in the form of half the budget going on food, a third to poorer members, and much on apparent corruption- “waste”) if it was what the people wanted, if today’s EU could put these things to a referendum-vote (without loosing it) (although if they did, they’d obviously be worthy of sincere respect).

Surely you can’t deny the Omens for the EU remaining a democracy (with election turnout consistently falling, even as EU powers rise) isn’t exactly good?

Originally posted by David_Reale
reply to post by mnemeth1

 

Then (assuming you're European) you should vote against more integration by your country into the EU. And, it would be wise, to vote people likeminded to you into the European Parliament, where they can help decentralize power from the European Union, and put it back into the government of your country.

Yeah, the problem with that though is if 51% of the people can be convinced that the EU will give them goodies, they will vote for it.

If the EU does come to be a sovereign Nation State in its own right, the founders will have trampled on the rights of the other 49% who rightfully opposed it.

This is the problem with democracy.

Two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner does not make for a peaceful or just society. It leads to the tyranny of the majority.

This is why all government must be local government. Government expanded beyond the means of citizens to actively participate in it will always lead to tyranny.

The US being the prime example of this.

If you, as an individual citizen, have absolutely no hope of being elected to a position in a government, then we can consider that government being wayyyyy to big for its own britches.

I would say US states are even a tad too big for their own britches. If we cut all the states in half and eliminated the federal government, I'd say we are closer to the correct size of government (if we are to have a coercively funded government).

Of course, I am against any coercively funded government at all.





[edit on 30-8-2010 by mnemeth1]

reply to post by mnemeth1


The leader of the Swedish Pirate Party, Rick Falkvinge, talked about the whole three wolves and a sheep thing. What he said was, there's something that goes beyond and above democracy, a little something called "human rights".

That means, even if the 51 percent want to cannibalize on the 49 percent, they can't, because the little act of eating the 49:ers violates the human rights of the 49:ers. And human rights do not answer to democracy, because they can never be restricted by law.

Like it or not, that's the way the system works. You don't like it - vote to change it.

Originally posted by David_Reale
reply to post by mnemeth1

 

The leader of the Swedish Pirate Party, Rick Falkvinge, talked about the whole three wolves and a sheep thing. What he said was, there's something that goes beyond and above democracy, a little something called "human rights".

That means, even if the 51 percent want to cannibalize on the 49 percent, they can't, because the little act of eating the 49:ers violates the human rights of the 49:ers. And human rights do not answer to democracy, because they can never be restricted by law.

Like it or not, that's the way the system works. You don't like it - vote to change it.

You can't vote to change it because once 51% are receiving benefits at the cost of the other 49, it is impossible to dislodge through voting.

Human rights mean nothing.

We have a US Constitution that supposedly protects our natural rights, but the US government violates it nearly by the minute.

Again, if you like what the US has become, then you should be in favor of the EU. All one needs to do is look at the current state of the US to understand what the EU will become.

reply to post by mnemeth1


No, it's not. Which is the reason why after one election year, Sweden ends up with a "red" government, and the next election, it ends up with a "blue" (right-side) government. The 51 and 49 percent are not solid - they change every year, as people's opinions and way of thinking change.

And the only reason human rights mean nothing to you is because somewhere along the line, you decided not to get pissed off when your human rights were violated. I can assure you, my human rights still mean a hell of a lot to me.

Just because the US turned into what it is today doesn't mean the EU will. I'm not clairvoyant - I don't pretend to know what the EU will become - and I don't believe that just because it happened to the US it will to Europe. In the end, it's up to Europeans to decide what will happen to their continent. And it's up to Europeans to make sure EU doesn't turn into a dictatorship. Whether we want it or not, is also up to us to decide - together.

Whether you like democracy or not, it's in our hands. Saying it's not is nothing but shifting blame and trying to avoid responsibility.

[edit on 30-8-2010 by David_Reale]

reply to post by David_Reale


The US has a two party system that changes regularly.

Doesn't mean much since both are a bunch of fascists.

Hence, your argument that party changes somehow prevent tyranny is disproved by empirical evidence.

Further, we can say that the EU will become a mirror image of the US if it is allowed to progress because this progression of statism has been recorded since the dawn of coercive government.

This is not something new that we can't predict. This is something that has historically happened over and over again, with predictable results.

reply to post by David_Reale


Oh by the way, the southern US states did get pissed off enough to do something about it.

It led to 700,000 dead Americans.

Americans that would have lived to see another day had the US federal government never been formed.

So go ahead and get pissed off later, rather than sooner.

reply to post by mnemeth1


Sweden, and most countries in Europe, does not have a two-party system. So I'm not terribly worried. And I don't think the EU will somehow cause a Civil War to break out in Europe. We'e done with the big wars. Remember, we've had our fair share - a larger share than the US - the Civil War was nothing in comparison to the World Wars. And the EU in its idea is uniting Europe, part of the reason being to prevent another World War.

Make of that what you will.

Again, if Europe wants the EU, then regardless of what you want, we'll have it. If Europe doesn't want it, then we won't have it. If you somehow think it'll turn into the United States of Europe, and cause a genocidal civil war in this continent, then use your influence and vote against the EU. It's as simple as that.

reply to post by David_Reale


"We'e done with the big wars."

That seems a bit presumptuous.

In terms of cost, we've already had a "bigger" war. We just paid for it on a credit card and the bills are about to come due.

Wars should not be thought of strictly in terms of human cost, but in terms of resources wasted that could have been put to productive use enriching life on this planet.

Lives matter, but so does the cost of wasted resources. Our masters have figured out a way to run warfare in the modern nuclear age where they can reap the benefits of unlimited defense spending without the unpleasant side-effects of wasted human capital and anti-war demonstrations.

If a government spends like its WWIII on defense spending, yet no one dies, isn't that just as economically bad?

In a perverse way, its economically worse, because now you have that many more mouths to feed with that many less resources.







[edit on 31-8-2010 by mnemeth1]

Originally posted by Master_007
Why just because you say so !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

would you like to give us some facts to back up this argument because a lot of people in the UK agree with what they are saying like it or not.

One simple fact, easily researched.. They are an anti EU political group who's main interest is in the removal of the UK from the EU. Almost everything they said in that above video were warped facts and false truths..

If you don't know enough about the EU to hear these, then I suggest you research them.

And so what, a lot of people in the UK agree with them. Most of these people reminisce of a time when the British Empire actually meant something and while living in this dream world, have been sucked in by the UKIP ideas.

If the EU is so bad, then how come the new UK PM is moving for a more powerful UK place in it? Because as always, the UK needs the EU, and as China and India completely overshadow it and the US finds it more and more irrelevant, it will once again do what it has done several times before and return to the EU offers with its public more demeaned and its politicians more unfavorable.

Actually.. Maybe I only see this because I understand the overall British Psyche as a close neighbour and regular visitor.. And there are several things I can say here that will only cause an argument.. But here's a different one..

If you guys hate it so much, then leave... Oh wait.. You will complain and complain etc but at the end of it, the UK wants to get more control in the EU.. So your complaining will only be viewed as another infamous British trait.

And so is the UKIP.

Europeans still remember vividly the 2 world wars fought on their soil. The League of Nations had the power to stop the 2nd WW from happening but did not use their collective power to do so.
IF you do not centralize power somewhat you run the risk of repeating history.

Originally posted by Dermo

Originally posted by Master_007
Why just because you say so !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

would you like to give us some facts to back up this argument because a lot of people in the UK agree with what they are saying like it or not.

One simple fact, easily researched.. They are an anti EU political group who's main interest is in the removal of the UK from the EU. Almost everything they said in that above video were warped facts and false truths..

If you don't know enough about the EU to hear these, then I suggest you research them.

And so what, a lot of people in the UK agree with them. Most of these people reminisce of a time when the British Empire actually meant something and while living in this dream world, have been sucked in by the UKIP ideas.

If the EU is so bad, then how come the new UK PM is moving for a more powerful UK place in it? Because as always, the UK needs the EU, and as China and India completely overshadow it and the US finds it more and more irrelevant, it will once again do what it has done several times before and return to the EU offers with its public more demeaned and its politicians more unfavorable.

Actually.. Maybe I only see this because I understand the overall British Psyche as a close neighbour and regular visitor.. And there are several things I can say here that will only cause an argument.. But here's a different one..

If you guys hate it so much, then leave... Oh wait.. You will complain and complain etc but at the end of it, the UK wants to get more control in the EU.. So your complaining will only be viewed as another infamous British trait.

And so is the UKIP.

the EU is robbing the populations of europe..it wont ask any citizens if they want it...and..they lie constantly when it suits them.

i dont want this sort of leadership having this much power..

reply to post by alienesque


If I remember correct, you're from the UK yea?

It was OK for you guys to take over half the planet, wipe out whoever didn't bend to your will, create proxy wars which helped result in WW1 and 2.. Ethnically cleanse your closest neighbour for centuries etc etc etc..

But when an Organization like the EU which has been created at every step by democratically elected leaders agreeing on it, is created.. Then its a problem?

Would it be Ok if British were running it tho? Of course it would.. Yea? I don't understand.

To be fair, I don't want the EU to have too much power either. Just enough unification that we don't have to worry about the US, China or India for the next 2 centuries. Simple as that. Because without the EU and European togetherness.. We're at the Mercy of whomever creates the most gravity as the superpowers rise in the East.

And I prefer Europe to the US, China, India and whomever the f*** else.