The Lisbon Treaty

[Phoenix]

So I assume some of you have already heard; the Irish voted Yes on Lisbon, and now the only impediments for its implementation are the Czechs and the Polish, and if it goes on long enough, the British.

Now, I was reading the comments after the vote, and I was a bit surprised to see that the merits and failings of the Treaty weren't discussed so much as what many perceive is a growing "anti-democracy" attitude in the EU, and even verbal attacks on Ireland and the Irish, claiming they are traitors, Nazis, idiots, etc for not voting No a second time.

Do you think there are legitimate concerns over the Treaty, or is it just ultra-nationalism and isolationism? What do you think of the Treaty?

Treaty of Lisbon - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[Ventux]

I can see why some would prefer to stay out of that. Hasn't the EU been suffering economically, with certain countries having to bail out others?

[Phoenix]

Well, it's suffering economically in the sense that almost every country suffered economically during the recession, but isn't what you described the point of the EU? European cooperation, no?

[Ventux]

Originally Posted by Phoenix

Well, it's suffering economically in the sense that almost every country suffered economically during the recession

Some countries did more than others, but since they all share the same currency, they all had to carry the burden.

but isn't what you described the point of the EU? European cooperation, no?

I suppose, but I can understand that some don't want to be part of it because of that.

[Phoenix]

But then, why join? There's benefits for all, of course, but some countries can clearly contribute more, and do. Why complain now? It clearly wasn't the cause of the recession, after all.

Some countries did more than others, but since they all share the same currency, they all had to carry the burden.

Well, not all of them. The UK, for example, still uses the pound.

[Ventux]

Originally Posted by Phoenix

But then, why join? There's benefits for all, of course, but some countries can clearly contribute more, and do. Why complain now? It clearly wasn't the cause of the recession, after all.

They don't want further entanglements? The idea of having a stronger president of the European Council and parliament probably raised red flags for some people.

Well, not all of them. The UK, for example, still uses the pound.

Most of them use the euro, though. I guess it's more of a currency problem than the EU itself, but I bet it's used as a reason.

[Phoenix]

They don't want further entanglements? The idea of having a stronger president of the European Council and parliament probably raised red flags for some people.

Why would it? It's not as if their sovereignty is being threatened.

[Ventux]

Originally Posted by Phoenix

Why would it? It's not as if their sovereignty is being threatened.

Diminishing, maybe?
I don't think so, personally, but it seems to me they might. More power to a centralized "government" equals less power to others, in the minds of a lot of people.

[Phoenix]

As far as I understand it, they just moved come of the power from the Commission to the Council, and established a President, plus are changing some of the decisions from unanimity to majority (since it's being difficult with 27 states). But the sovereignty isn't being touched at all. If it was, do you really think the 27 governments that have approved it would've done so?

[Ventux]

Originally Posted by Phoenix

As far as I understand it, they just moved come of the power from the Commission to the Council, and established a President, plus are changing some of the decisions from unanimity to majority (since it's being difficult with 27 states). But the sovereignty isn't being touched at all. If it was, do you really think the 27 governments that have approved it would've done so?

Originally Posted by me

More power to a centralized "government" equals less power to others, in the minds of a lot of people.

The sovereignty may not be necessarily affected, but the paranoia is there. I don't agree with them, but I can understand why there is opposition to the change, baseless or not.
It's just like with health insurance reform in the United States, there are some who genuinely oppose it because they do not want the federal government to have more power, even if it would help them, even if it would not in any way infringe on their rights.

[Phoenix]

So you would say that there aren't legitimate concerns over it and it's just stupid paranoia, right?

[Ventux]

I guess so, heh.
They could point out some supposed faults of the EU, but that would be a supplementary argument.

[Square Ninja]

world war II was fought over alliances and agreements

believe it or not, not all of the wounds have healed yet

[Phoenix]

It just seems that, at least from the comments that I read, didn't really know what's in the treaty and were just scared to death of European integration.

But, if what you say is true, why should they? It's not like this generation was alive for WW2. We might have heard old war stories from parents and grandparents, but this extent of paranoia shouldn't exist.

[Square Ninja]

Originally Posted by Phoenix

It just seems that, at least from the comments that I read, didn't really know what's in the treaty and were just scared to death of European integration.

But, if what you say is true, why should they? It's not like this generation was alive for WW2. We might have heard old war stories from parents and grandparents, but this extent of paranoia shouldn't exist.

You'd be surprised.