EU welcomes 10 new members

[Rogue 9]

I believe you have little in the way of musical taste.

Perhaps I should clarify: I have nothing against Beethoven's 9th symphony, but I don't care for it as an anthem. For one thing, you cannot sing it (AFIK, the EU anthem has no lyrics). Also, remember what happened to the Russians in the 90's after they disbanded old Soviet anthem? (which they recently brought back, but with new lyrics).

Can't sing it?!? I just did so in concert a couple weeks ago, so buzz off!

[Exmoor Cat]

I so agree. Once my finals and the June elections are over, I'll probably be helping on the "yes" campaign.

They really should think of us students volunteers when scheduling elections June is no good at all, still if I go into full on work avoidance mode I can see leafleting in the rain seeming much more appealing than revision.
Have you actually managed to get a job with them or are you serving the cause free and bulking out your CV a bit?

Am lookign at organiser/office jobs with the lib dems, but spent most of my time as free labour in various campaigns. Have stood for council a couple of times too.....

[Exmoor Cat]

What's there not to like, anyway? One of the best musical pieces in the history of Mankind, well suited for one of its most magnificient creations.

For a Pro-EU bod, I'm actually not that keen on Ode To Joy as the anthem, it has too many backward-looking historical refernces that really do not help, as well as being hijacked by various others.

My personal opinion is that we ought ot get a new peice from the likes of Philip Glass, or Zbegniew Preisner (whose own European athem can be heard on Three Colours Blue)

[Dahak]

I believe you have little in the way of musical taste.

Perhaps I should clarify: I have nothing against Beethoven's 9th symphony, but I don't care for it as an anthem. For one thing, you cannot sing it (AFIK, the EU anthem has no lyrics). Also, remember what happened to the Russians in the 90's after they disbanded old Soviet anthem? (which they recently brought back, but with new lyrics).

This special part does have lyrics, so to speak.
Friedrich Schiller's "Ode an die Freude", hence the name "Ode to joy" for this particular bit.

[Colonel Olrik]

Perhaps I should clarify: I have nothing against Beethoven's 9th symphony, but I don't care for it as an anthem. For one thing, you cannot sing it (AFIK, the EU anthem has no lyrics).

Well, there's a good reason for it. There are now 20 different languages within the EU. By making it non-lyrical the anthem is universal.

[Sharp-kun]

In the short term I just hope us Brits don’t screw things up by voting against the constitution when it finally gets written & we get our referendum.

I get the feeling we will, for 2 reasons:

1) The masses have very little idea of what it really means, and are likely to vote "no" based on tabloids twisting the facts.

2) Some people will do it simply to get at Blair.

[Plekhanov]

Am lookign at organiser/office jobs with the lib dems, but spent most of my time as free labour in various campaigns. Have stood for council a couple of times too.....

Nice to meet a fellow Lib Dem online and such an active one too you really put me to shame, I’ve spent far too much time in pressure groups this year but next year I’m gonna pull back on the single issue stuff and dedicate my campaigning to the party, having Blunkett on my doorstep is a real motivation with the election looming.

As far as the anthem goes I love the 9th but I can see that it has a bit of baggage so a new piece would be nice, not sure about Glass though, Preisner is fantastic I especially like the Van den Burgen concert piece from La Double Vie de Veronique sadly I think it would be a bit too demanding for most of us to sing along to.

[Plekhanov]

In the short term I just hope us Brits don’t screw things up by voting against the constitution when it finally gets written & we get our referendum.

I get the feeling we will, for 2 reasons:

1) The masses have very little idea of what it really means, and are likely to vote "no" based on tabloids twisting the facts.

Things aren’t looking too rosy at the minute but there is hope

We’ should have well organised, funded & hopefully effective Yes campaign you can expect business to pump a fair bit of cash into it so hopefully that should help us counteract Murdoch and the Mails influence.

The referendum will force all the pro EU MPs who’ve been hiding all this time (which is nearly all the cowardly bastards) to stand up and be counted.

The masses voted yes last time, the constitution will be a difficult case to make but if we get across the consequences of a No and benefits of a Yes I think they’ll see where their interests lie.

2) Some people will do it simply to get at Blair.

Hopefully we can point out just how much of a nose face situation that would be.

[TheDarkling]

I think Blair may have an ace up his Teflon sleeves.

If the Torys fail to make a good degree of headway in the next election (which Blair is already preparing the ground for) then it is likely the Torys will do the classic Tory action of scalping their leader. With this happening so close to the referendum (since the referendum will likely be a few months after the general election) the leadership candidates will have to voice their opinion on Europe, this will split the party (as it has done before) and while they present a disunited front Tony leads Labour, the Lib Dems, Plaid Cymru, the SNP and business interests in a united campaign for the EU.

While this may seem a bit far fetched the Torys weak point when it comes to party unity has always been the EU and I can see that being exploited by Blair if he gets the chance.

On the issue of the referendum itself, 3 months ago 50% were undecided (with 35% against and 15% for) now while this has decreased these people aren't basing their decisions on any real arguments so it shouldn’t be too difficult to shift their opinions, still Blair has his work cut out for him I think.

[Jeremy]

Last one to MerCoSur is a rotten egg.

[Plekhanov]

I think Blair may have an ace up his Teflon sleeves.

If the Torys fail to make a good degree of headway in the next election (which Blair is already preparing the ground for) then it is likely the Torys will do the classic Tory action of scalping their leader.

I dunno about the Tory’s loosing Howard he seems by some distance the best leader they’ve had for a while (though of course surpassing IDS & Hague was never going to be difficult) still I hope you’re right the lower the bastards sink the better, I just hope the voters remember him as home secretary with even ¼ the bitterness I do and then the Tory’s should make very little headway.

Tony leads Labour, the Lib Dems, Plaid Cymru, the SNP and business interests in a united campaign for the EU.

Please don’t suggest that we (by which I mean the Lib Dems) will let that 2 faced, Bush’s arse licking, self delusional, war mongering, messianic, twat lead us anywhere we’ll be campaigning for a Yes and we might let Blair have the biggest chair but that’s as far as it goes. In the spirit of constructive politics (which of course we always adhere to) we will do what’s right for the country, suppress our revulsion & campaign along side him, but please don’t say he’ll be leading us I don’t think I’ll be able to face people on the doorstep if they think I’m representing him.

While this may seem a bit far fetched the Torys weak point when it comes to party unity has always been the EU and I can see that being exploited by Blair if he gets the chance.

Sadly this has become less the case since 1997 as the Tory’s have lost much of their pro EU membership, the argument seems to be increasingly between those who want to pull out completely & those who want to hang around on the edges. Hopefully we can rely upon the cost of a NO vote to get the moderate Tories onside though I must say I’m not too hopeful.

On the issue of the referendum itself, 3 months ago 50% were undecided (with 35% against and 15% for) now while this has decreased these people aren't basing their decisions on any real arguments so it shouldn’t be too difficult to shift their opinions,

I agree with you here, most of the anti EU opinion is just cheap nationalistic sentiment with the referendum looming and the results of the vote really mattering people will take another look at the EU and think again.

[Ma Deuce]

What's there not to like, anyway? One of the best musical pieces in the history of Mankind, well suited for one of its most magnificient creations.

I agree with you about the peice, but not the EU. IMHO, it is little more than a tool of big business. Why is it that the EU makes it so hard for outside countries to export into it, yet whines when these same countries take similar measures against it? (i.e. the US steel tariff). Why is it that the EU whined about the US not ratifying Kyoto (which would have crippled the US economy), when none of the major EU countries had ratified either?

When you boil it down, the only ties that bind the EU are economic ties. Political and idological unity is fragile at best, nonixistant at worse (the diplomatic wrangling preceding Gulf War II proved that). Most member states of the EU joined for their own economic benefit, not some wishy-washy pie in the sky vision of peace and unity for mankind. If it wasn't for the dandy free trade (and now common currency) that the member states enjoy between themselves, the EU could never exist.

[TheDarkling]

I dunno about the Tory’s loosing Howard he seems by some distance the best leader they’ve had for a while (though of course surpassing IDS & Hague was never going to be difficult) still I hope you’re right the lower the bastards sink the better, I just hope the voters remember him as home secretary with even ¼ the bitterness I do and then the Tory’s should make very little headway.

I expect the election to be won on the strength of Blair simply saying *cough*Poll Tax*cough* and then sitting back down.

Please don’t suggest that we (by which I mean the Lib Dems) will let that 2 faced, Bush’s arse licking, self delusional, war mongering, messianic, twat lead us anywhere we’ll be campaigning for a Yes and we might let Blair have the biggest chair but that’s as far as it goes. In the spirit of constructive politics (which of course we always adhere to) we will do what’s right for the country, suppress our revulsion & campaign along side him, but please don’t say he’ll be leading us I don’t think I’ll be able to face people on the doorstep if they think I’m representing him.

I apologise if I have offended any protest vot.... I mean Lib Dem voters.

Sadly this has become less the case since 1997 as the Tory’s have lost much of their pro EU membership, the argument seems to be increasingly between those who want to pull out completely & those who want to hang around on the edges. Hopefully we can rely upon the cost of a NO vote to get the moderate Tories onside though I must say I’m not too hopeful.

While that is somewhat true (the pro EU members were already from marginal seats that were lost) a good portion of the few remaining big names in the Tory party are pro EU. Of course if it comes down to a leadership race the Anti EU candidate will be chosen since the party faithful are doing the voting.

I agree with you here, most of the anti EU opinion is just cheap nationalistic sentiment with the referendum looming and the results of the vote really mattering people will take another look at the EU and think again.

That would be my hope.

[TheDarkling]

Last one to MerCoSur is a rotten egg.

The EU is already their biggest trading partner and we give them a fair amount of funding to actually build the infrastructure required to make it work.

[Plekhanov]

What's there not to like, anyway? One of the best musical pieces in the history of Mankind, well suited for one of its most magnificient creations.

I agree with you about the peice, but not the EU. IMHO, it is little more than a tool of big business.

Sure the EU helps big business that’s an inevitable (and desirable) bi-product of helping European businesses of all sizes. But if it’s simply a tool of big business why are EU workers amongst the most priviledged in the world?

Why is it that the EU makes it so hard for outside countries to export into it, yet whines when these same countries take similar measures against it? (i.e. the US steel tariff).

I think you’ll find this is a universal characteristic of all trade blocks.

Why is it that the EU whined about the US not ratifying Kyoto (which would have crippled the US economy), when none of the major EU countries had ratified either?

Wrong all 15 EU countries ratified Kyoto in 2002.

When you boil it down, the only ties that bind the EU are economic ties. Political and idological unity is fragile at best, nonixistant at worse

We do have extremely intertwined economies but there is far more to it than that, the EU nations have profound social, philosophical and political similarities. We have a shared tragic history going back well over a millennia which has helped created a continent with many languages and local peculiarities but with essentially a broadly similar culture and political outluck.
Despite the Catholic Church’s complaints to the contrary we are the agnostic continent, unique in our shared lack of belief.

(the diplomatic wrangling preceding Gulf War II proved that).

The pro war governments were, as far as I’m aware, in every case acting against the wishes of the population who shared the common European belief that the war was wrong, what does the posturing of a few right wing buffoons prove?

Most member states of the EU joined for their own economic benefit, not some wishy-washy pie in the sky vision of peace and unity for mankind. If it wasn't for the dandy free trade (and now common currency) that the member states enjoy between themselves, the EU could never exist.

So you’re arguing that if it wasn’t for the fact that the EU worked so well and provided such tremendous benefits to its’ members countries wouldn’t be so keen to join? You make a very hard case there so I guess I’ll have to give in and admit that Lithuania and the rest were attracted to the EU largely by its incredible economic success.

I’ll just hope the fact that the EU has led to the single longest period of sustained peace and prosperity in European history may have also played some small part in the new members collective minds. After all you never know but decades of soviet domination may have motivated people to join a democratic coalition of nations dedicated to peace, human rights and shared prosperity.

[Plekhanov]

I expect the election to be won on the strength of Blair simply saying *cough*Poll Tax*cough* and then sitting back down.

If only the rest of the population had our memory....

I apologise if I have offended any protest vot.... I mean Lib Dem voters.

offend the voters all you like it’s the idea that I’d be bothering them on a mission from the ever grinning one that upsets me

While that is somewhat true (the pro EU members were already from marginal seats that were lost) a good portion of the few remaining big names in the Tory party are pro EU. Of course if it comes down to a leadership race the Anti EU candidate will be chosen since the party faithful are doing the voting.

True many of the big names (Clarke and so forth) are surprisingly rational it’s the no name back benchers and rank and file who are the foil hat wearing, EU superstate out to swamp us with refugees and make us eat straight cucumbers brigade.

That would be my hope.

Here’s hoping we’re proved right come the referendum

[TheDarkling]

If only the rest of the population had our memory....

I think that Labour and the Lib Dems will mention it to those who don't.

offend the voters all you like it’s the idea that I’d be bothering them on a mission from the ever grinning one that upsets me

I remember when Labour and the Lib Dems were doing the tactical voting thing, a Lib Dem guys come around to the house "Vote Labour, dear god vote labour and end the Tory reign of terror, please I beg you" but he needn't have bothered since a sack of coal could win my area as long as it has a red ribbon attached to it.

True many of the big names (Clarke and so forth) are surprisingly rational it’s the no name back benchers and rank and file who are the foil hat wearing, EU superstate out to swamp us with refugees and make us eat straight cucumbers brigade.

I expect that if Howard goes out after the election that Clarke will give it another go (third times a charm) which will lead to a battle over the EU in the Tory ranks (and he did get a fair portion of the vote among the MP's last time out). But once it goes to the party members Clarke will lose, which shows the idiocy of the grass roots since polls indicate he is the most popular Tory with the general public. Obviously members of the Tory party agree with the rest of us that anything to prevent a Tory government is a good thing.

Here’s hoping we’re proved right come the referendum

The ironic thing is that I have long wanted politicians to set the public straight about the EU but I dislike the precedent that having a referendum on the issue sets. I should be careful what I wish for in the future.

[Ma Deuce]

Sure the EU helps big business that’s an inevitable (and desirable) bi-product of helping European businesses of all sizes. But if it’s simply a tool of big business why are EU workers amongst the most priviledged in the world?

Find me some evidence that their priveledged status is directly because of the EU.

I think you’ll find this is a universal characteristic of all trade blocks.

Conceded, but most other trade blocs don't pretend to be anything else but trade blocs

Wrong all 15 EU countries ratified Kyoto in 2002.

Good for them. That doesn't make Kyoto any less stupid. The fact that it exempts developing countries that "lacked advanced pollution control techniques" really made it irrelivant, since several developing countries (like China) are among the biggest culprits, another example being Brazil, whose "slash-and-burn" methods of agriculture produce four times the "greenhouse gasses" as all the automobiles in North America (this sometimes makes me wonder if Kyoto is not someone's attempt at wealth re-distribution). I believe the US Senate's position on Kyoto ammounted to: "We'll ratify Kyoto only when the same standards are applied to everyone"

The pro war governments were, as far as I’m aware, in every case acting against the wishes of the population who shared the common European belief that the war was wrong, what does the posturing of a few right wing buffoons prove?

That isn't the point at all. The point is the EU cannot stop member governments from taking actions contrary to the collective. Is Britain's EU membership in danger because of Iraq? was their economic status in the group penalized in any way? What about the 8 (IIRC) other pro-war EU member governments?

So you’re arguing that if it wasn’t for the fact that the EU worked so well and provided such tremendous benefits to its’ members countries wouldn’t be so keen to join? You make a very hard case there so I guess I’ll have to give in and admit that Lithuania and the rest were attracted to the EU largely by its incredible economic success.

If the EU succeded in producing peace and political solidarity and whatnot, but left it's members economically weaker, do you still think other countries would be so keen on joining? I stand by my position that the reasons for most countries joining the EU are purely economic.

An example would be Switzerland, who is not likely to join in the forseeable future because they seem to believe that EU membership will cost them more money than it will earn them.

you never know but decades of soviet domination may have motivated people to join a democratic coalition of nations dedicated to peace, human rights and shared prosperity.

I'm not holding my breath. I beleive that civilization is but a veneer, beneath which humans are little better than the wild animals from which we evolved. Call me a pessimest if you will, but thats just how I see things. You on the other hand are obviously an idealist, but I respect your views.

One would think that centuries of authoritarian excesses and the ultimate result of such would make Russia see the error of that system, but noooo. Russia is becoming more authoritarian and restrictive by the day (thanks to Comrade Putin), and many Russians actually want it that way. If Russia joins the EU as it is, then I will know for certain that all the EU's preachy ideals are in fact meaningless and hypocritical (thankfully that is not the case. Putin recently said that Russia won't be joining the EU in the near future).

I still can't bring myself to see the EU as anything other than just a trade bloc pretending to be something more than it really is.

This quote suddenly comes to mind (pity I can't remember who uttered it) "Nations have no permanant allies. Only permanant interests"

[TheDarkling]

Lord Palmerston said

We have no eternal allies and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interests are perpetual and eternal and those interests it is our duty to follow.

As for the EU being just a trade block, that isn't exactly true. The EU does conduct its own foreign policy and uses its private funds and ability to make trade deals as its main way of influencing people. The EU also has a parliament and supreme court which a simple trade block would have little use for. Joint citizenship, legal authority, open internal borders, the right to vote in local elections wherever you take residence in the EU and increasing military cooperation. An EU arrest warrant, EU external borders being placed under EU control (something which is currently being worked on) and many other such things. While the EU certainly isn't a federal nation it goes far beyond being a simple trading bloc and if trends continue closer integration is likely.

[Plekhanov]

I haven’t really got time to answer your other points so I hope you’ll forgive me for concentrating upon the one of them (and be grateful I’m not spouting off about PR in responce to the tactical voting bit, I’m sure you’ve heard it all before).

The ironic thing is that I have long wanted politicians to set the public straight about the EU but I dislike the precedent that having a referendum on the issue sets. I should be careful what I wish for in the future.

As someone lucky enough to have found my true home in the Lib Dems (apart from a few quibbles about Palestine) I believe in increased public involvement in politics at all levels including referenda on issues such as the EU constitution. I can see however that to the more conventional UK political out luck the referendum makes no sense as it won’t affect our sovereignty the measure upon which previous referenda have generally been measured and is simply a case of the government passing on decisions it didn’t think the commons had the guts to make.

[kojikun]

All the EU needs to do is change its name to the European Republic. And if, maybe, it starts to expand outside of Europe, it can just be the Republic.

Hopefully you can see where I'm going with this.

Seriously, tho, when is the EU going to become more unified? It's still rather fractured when it comes to economic policies and international affairs. And lets not forget the actual legislature.. x_x

[Plekhanov]

Find me some evidence that their priveledged status is directly because of the EU.

The Social Charter might be a good starting point for the legal conditions of workers, as for the overall economic condition which enables us to enact the social charter I believe that the EU in all its previous forms played a crucial role in enabling Europeans to raise themselves so rapidly back out of the stone age they’d effectively bombed themselves back into in 1945.

When you boil it down, the only ties that bind the EU are economic ties. Political and idological unity is fragile at best, nonixistant at worse (the diplomatic wrangling preceding Gulf War II proved that).

The pro war governments were, as far as I’m aware, in every case acting against the wishes of the population who shared the common European belief that the war was wrong, what does the posturing of a few right wing buffoons prove?

That isn't the point at all. The point is the EU cannot stop member governments from taking actions contrary to the collective. Is Britain's EU membership in danger because of Iraq? was their economic status in the group penalized in any way? What about the 8 (IIRC) other pro-war EU member governments?

That is the point, you argued that the diplomatic wrangling showed a lack of “Political and idological unity within the EU I showed that this was a superficial disunity amongst a transient leadership (goodbye lying Spanish Popular Party) the fact that the best efforts of the US government only managed to sway the heads of a few EU executives but left the population unmoved is just shows how united the populace of the EU is.

The EU is a loose coalition of independent states (that I sincerely hope is) currently moving towards closer union there is no requirement that every member agrees upon every issue. Why should the EU penalise independent members governments for having their own opinions (no matter how unpopular with their populations they were) the EU is a primarily economic grouping hopefully moving towards closer social & political union.

If the EU succeded in producing peace and political solidarity and whatnot, but left it's members economically weaker, do you still think other countries would be so keen on joining?

No but as it produces “peace and political solidarity and whatnot,” as well making its members economically richer that’s not really a very good argument is it?

I stand by my position that the reasons for most countries joining the EU are purely economic.

Wrong, the reasons are largely but not purely economic that doesn’t mean that there aren’t also significant social, political and diplomatic benefits to joining, which are also significant factors.

An example would be Switzerland, who is not likely to join in the forseeable future because they seem to believe that EU membership will cost them more money than it will earn them.

The Swiss are an exception granted, but then again they did somehow manage to miss out on the more recent parts of the “tragic history” I mentioned earlier.

I'm not holding my breath. I beleive that civilization is but a veneer, beneath which humans are little better than the wild animals from which we evolved. Call me a pessimest if you will, but thats just how I see things. You on the other hand are obviously an idealist, but I respect your views.

As far as human nature goes I’d describe myself as a pessimist which is one reason that I’m so pro-European as I think its one of the few occasions in human history when our better natures and self interest have so fundamentally interlocked.

One would think that centuries of authoritarian excesses and the ultimate result of such would make Russia see the error of that system, but noooo. Russia is becoming more authoritarian and restrictive by the day (thanks to Comrade Putin), and many Russians actually want it that way.

The development of a democratic society and political culture is a drawn out and painful process unfortunately the Bolshevik revolution in 1917 prematurely cut off the development of Russia’s.

If Russia joins the EU as it is, then I will know for certain that all the EU's preachy ideals are in fact meaningless and hypocritical (thankfully that is not the case. Putin recently said that Russia won't be joining the EU in the near future).

I don’t think it’s Putin’s decision to make I’ve never heard anybody seriously talk of Russia joining, even if we thought we could absorb that many new poor citizens, it’s unlikely the UK, France or Germany like an enormous new member disrupting the big 3, besides we really stand by our human rights stuff, which is one reason why Turkey (with it’s brutal suppression of the Kurds) is going to find it difficult to join.

I still can't bring myself to see the EU as anything other than just a trade bloc pretending to be something more than it really is.

This quote suddenly comes to mind (pity I can't remember who uttered it) "Nations have no permanant allies. Only permanant interests"

I think Darkling and myself have addressed this point comprehensively over our last few posts.

[Murazor]

Unites States of Europe, here we go!!

[salm]

All the EU needs to do is change its name to the European Republic. And if, maybe, it starts to expand outside of Europe, it can just be the Republic.

Hopefully you can see where I'm going with this.

Seriously, tho, when is the EU going to become more unified? It's still rather fractured when it comes to economic policies and international affairs. And lets not forget the actual legislature.. x_x

in the long term it´s probably better to let the whole thing evolve slowly than jumping the gun. older generations still have stronger feelings about their nations. in the future generations these feelings will hopefully decrease to a minimum, like when germany was united from a whole patchwork of single states such as baden, württemberg, hohenzollern etcetc. you don´t build a nation of 450 million people over night. give it a couple of centuries time.

[Dahak]

An example would be Switzerland, who is not likely to join in the forseeable future because they seem to believe that EU membership will cost them more money than it will earn them.

Switzerland isn't joining (so far), because they are fiercly devoted to their neutrality.