Convex, you should know that that's not true. You also have a federal level in the States which shows variations. You can witness widely disparate laws in different parts of the country and capital punishment practice is evidence of this. Such things matter to those that move around through different jurisdictions.
Tying this in with EU norms, the Subsidiarity Protocol, an appendage (annex) to the Amsterdam Treaty of 1999, shows you that the level of governance matters. For those that plod through life largely unaffected by governmental dictates (at any level), you are right. However, the interventionist EU often abandons the express provisions of the abovementioned protocol and exceeds its own stated competence. Linking this in with Poland, they tried to regulate the length and straightness of pickles/gherkins. Now tell me, what friggin right do they have to do this? Local producers (the level below the 2 you stated) have been producing these things according to family recipes for generations now. What does a bigwig member of the suit brigade have to do with that? NOTHING!
You also have a federal level in the States which shows variations.
That's exactly the current problem Seanie...where do we want to go from here?
Do we want an US of Europe? A federalist EU with much more power to the EU parliament...with a REAL president and a REAL foreign minister (not to mention the same policies for all?)
Right now many wish for the contrary...much more power to the countries, a weak Brussel...no real heads (they are perfectly happy with insignificant Rumpoy and Ashton as mere figureheads without any power).
There is a reason why they are more busy with ordering the size of the gherkins than to build a common foreign, defense or energy policy.
What do we want? But one thing is for sure, we can't have it both ways. So be careful if you point to federal countries like the US or Germany...they are totally different from the EU and we can't go there if the people don't want it.
Then Germany would again get a poor and unstable neighbour....we so don't want that! :(
No we don't, it was a bit sarcastic..
You also have a federal level in the States which shows variations. You can witness widely disparate laws in different parts of the country and capital punishment practice is evidence of this. Such things matter to those that move around through different jurisdictions.
The problem is when the federal government clings on to something and begins enforcing laws on a local level. That's why you have things like a DEA, "Illegal Immigrants" on a Federal level, federal business regulations.
Those are local issues, no need for multiple levels of wasteful government to implement their unified will on the levels that are closer to the citizens. The further that the legislation process moves away from the citizens, the more wasteful and disconnected it becomes. No need for an EU law making body. Stick to the concepts of free trade, free movement, contract enforcement. No need to legislate how to milk cows.
No one sees much of a difference between being governed by an inept national government, or an inept supernational government. Quite a few people are seeing the wealth transfer from West to East that is happening. I'm with you though, Poland should leave the EU and return all the money that the government and its people were granted.
The money that was granted to Poland, was one of the biggest argument for bringing Poland into the union.
And here we have an interesting fact. Why did the western leaders agree to grant even more money to Poland, under the meetings in Copenhagen in 2002 ? Because of the economic development each year, which brings benefits for the union.
They already then knew, that Poland would be one of the highest developed countries in Europe because of its size, geographic and market.
I'm not totally against the EU, I'm just making a point about Eu's authority, legally speaking.
And here we have an interesting fact. Why did the western leaders agree to grant even more money to Poland, under the meetings in Copenhagen in 2002 ? Because of the economic development each year, which brings benefits for the union.
They already then knew, that Poland would be one of the highest developed countries in Europe because of its size, geographic and market.
One of the main pillars of the EU is to support weaker economies to spread peace, prosperity and stability on the continent. All sides are going to be the winner because of that!
I'm not totally against the EU, I'm just making a point about Eu's authority, legally speaking.
Good question, BB. I think we need a full-scale review of the notion of direct effect and the transposition of EU Directives. The EU, IMHO, doesn't conduct a broad enough sweep when it comes to accession and ratification criteria and agreements, e.g think Turkey and accession discussions based almost solely on human rights (one article even. Art 8 of the ECHR). Harmonisation/streamlining sounds all well and good but sometimes resistance and incompatibility have the potential to thwart the plan of 'ever closer integration'. The only recent rocking of the boat in America was Texas and their rumbling about severing themselves. It died down quickly. In Europe, however, it's a different ballgame. Stubborn players (Britain was for so long) will stymie the Eurocrats and rifts will begin to emerge. We can't go there if the people don't want it, very well said!! There has been enough loss of national sovereignty as it is.
I hear what you are saying, convex, but we are already off down that road. Part of a lawyer's training is how to transpose EU Directives and interpret the intentions of the drafters according to canons of construction. Subsidiarity was a stroke of genius in a sense. However, it's a bit like a point I was teaching the other day, and Animal Farm for that matter when the system gets corrupted. In the sphere of the environment, there is broad-based consultation when it comes to 'scoping', the preliminary stage of an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). However, it doesn't screw with the plans of the Eurocrats. They maintain too much control when it comes to the protection of habitats, for example.
Anyway, I'm beginning to ramble. This matters for Poland as they were on a fixed path on many matters through LK and his vetoing. He was set in his ways but there has to be some middle ground as it stands. Tusk has the ability to compromise but the question is one of balance.
One of the main pillars of the EU is to support weaker economies to spread peace, prosperity and stability on the continent. All sides are going to be the winner because of that!
I didn't ague about that. The creation of EU was from the result of WW2, to make peace in Europe, starting with common heritage of coal and steel .
What exactly?
EU legislation overcomes with the commission, all national laws. That's why the resistance to the union is common, all over Europe specially in the Scandinavian countries.
A good work...even a bit hard to follow for the longest part if one isn't so knowledgeable in polish history...but well done! :)
EU legislation overcomes with the commission, all national laws. That's why the resistance to the union is common, all over Europe specially in the Scandinavian countries.
Again...the same question...where do we want to go from here. Do we like to keep it as not much more as a trading union or do we want to build a federal Europe? That's a question for the next decades I think...
PS: Some people can see the advantages of a federal Europe that can compete with the powerblocs of US, China or Russia...something a mere trade union just can't!
Again...the same question...where do we want to go from here. Do we like to keep it as not much more as a trading union or do we want to build a federal Europe? That's a question for the next decades I think...
PS: Some people can see the advantages of a federal Europe that can compete with the powerblocs of US, China or Russia...something a mere trade union just can't!
In the internation Perspective, some wants to create a federal union as a response to China and the states. But will that work, can a European integration overcome the national, which is needed to create such a thing ?
sociological speaking, what do you want for yourself ? Strong states in the union, or one strong union ? - I don't think we can have both.
But will that work, can a European integration overcome the national, which is needed to create such a thing ?
That my friend, is the big question! :)
I have no answer to that yet... Some months back I would had said yes, we are able...generations after the last war...with open borders...the young generation growing up as Europeans...living, studying, marrying, working across the EU...
But then came the PIIG-crisis and I learned about myself that even the most pro-EU German harbors to much nationalism to be as selfless as needed to give up ones own national rights and the "we-first"-thinking! ;)
So how can we demand that from others what we ourselves aren't willing to give up?
There is a delicate balance at play here. It's important not to see the EU as one functional unit, completely devoid of individual state influence. We are already seeing some in America and in Asia wary of the rise of the EU to prominence. If it became far more integrated, we could see excessive competition at work and then the globalists would have overstepped the mark. As it stands, a little envy is ok. The globalists don't want it to become an Us Vs Them scenario in which we are pitted against other heavy hitters. They still harbour ambitions to bridge gaps and eventually introduce things like the Emero, a currency for America and Europe. I'm glad that Poland, like Britain, is holding onto its currency for now. The EURO would make life more expensive for many and taxes are being raised too :(
Poland is a special case because it has sought self determination after having been raped by the Soviets. Many have witnessed Poland transform itself into a free market economy and, esp recently, attract a lot of inward investment. BB is absolutely right, what do we want? I fear that the EU will encroach excessively into the lives of Poles and it all hinges on how 'certain things' pan out/unfold. Global engineering is a work in progress!
I fear that the EU will encroach excessively into the lives of Poles and it all hinges on how 'certain things' pan out/unfold.
I'm against the "the EU will do this or that"-speak as if the Union is some faceless, monolithic monster we have no control over.
Curiosly the same people like to speak about the regional governments the same way...regular multi party free votings or not. ;)
If there are lives "encroached" by the EU it's the lives of the French and the Germans...founders and paymasters...but still most people wouldn't want to have it any other way. So it can't be that bad! :)
It's hardly the model of democracy, BB. Where is the appraisal of their work as undemocratically elected people? Poland must take the bad with the good. The EU will come across as intrusive in some ways but helpful in others.
So how can we demand that from others what we ourselves aren't willing to give up?
The famous German sociologist, Ulrick Bech, did actually speak about the making of an federal union, which couldn't be possible without a federal integration also, and that would overcome the cultural identities. That would in his eyes, be self destructive of the great nations and continent.
He sees the importance of the sovereignties, and through that we shall create a union. That's why I don't see a centralized union with Poland. But if we could reform that, then I promise won't talk about an exit from the union hehe. :)
I'm sorry if I seemed nationalistic in my threats, just saw the link "Polish history in 10 min." and I couldn't stop feeling my patriotic veins. :)
I just want what is best for Poland and its people, and make sure that what is polish, is kept polish, I love my country. :)
I just want what is best for Poland and its people, and make sure that what is polish, is kept polish, I love my country. :)
...and that you should! Nothing wrong with that. :)
But I disagree with the belief that integration would mean loss of cultural identity. Germany for examples lives with countless regional identities...heritage of centuries of being a plethorage of little Länder and Duchies. Countless customs, dialects, dishes, preferences, even national characteristics.
A federal Germany didn't destroy all that...we are Germans and still also Bavarians, Prussians, Swabians, Frisians etc...
So, why shouldn't that work in the bigger picture too?
To be fair, BB, I'm not a member of a committee which judges based on 2 weeks in office like what happened in America when Barack Obama was given the Nobel Peace Prize. It was decided in early February (many sources say) and he came to office on Jan 20, 2009. Kommie has only been in for a week, I think. That's too early to judge but the writing on the wall is that he will merely rubber stamp what Tusk proposes.
It was a double-edged sword with LK. He would defend Polish interests to a fair extent but he had an overly conservative view of things and, as a Catholic, he really lacked forgiveness. To me, it is very simple. The Nazi regime, led by an Austrian, is a monster of yesteryear and was hard to overhaul. Those within Nazi ranks tried but to no avail, some got unlucky. Germans of today cannot be held to account but LK and his bro just couldn't move on. The same with the Russians. Tusk has good relations with Putin though I would urge caution. I just hope he knows how to represent Poland well as he didn't show that with the missile shield.
So, sth like the Obameter that the BBC had? ;) The first 100 days of his tenure were scrutinised.
His first move looks like he is going to approve of a tax increase from 22 to 23%. Oh, and he has manned the cross area with the City Guard rather than with police. Frankly speaking, that's a joke! Even I know that they are for minor misdemeanours like speeding or drinking on public benches, parking in the wrong places etc etc. They are for individual offences and not collective patrolling. The man is off to a bad start!
[quote=Bratwurst Boy] So, why shouldn't that work in the bigger picture too?[/
Because of the historical ties with the Germans and the German language, puts up the federal state.
That wouldn't work in the bigger picture, the Europeans are to different. Just look at the different state model and welfare, the Scandinavians pays a lot of taxes to fund the universal welfare model, which to many others seems socialistic, you guys in Germany has created a selective model where you pay your insurance through your work, and the English pays for them self's, do you see the picture ? If we can't co-fund a common state model, we can't centralize the union.
And again, the language is to important.. It brings people together, not politics or ideas of a united Europe!
So therefor, you can't integrate 27 different people.. !
Very good point, Arch. Norway had the democratic decency to conduct full and open discussions on accession. The people saw the problems involved and asked their government to back off. Denmark operates under much the same basis. However, don't underestimate the power of the globalists to engineer mixed approaches into a workable format. They will chisel away at it until they find a way to bridge things.
However, don't underestimate the power of the globalists
Names...we want names Seanie! :)
The people saw the problems involved and asked their government to back off.
Norway is a special case...they are the european form of a desert-oil-country....able to make the life of their citizens paradisic just because they are sitting on oil.
Not fair compared to the majority of countries who have to toil hard for everything and surely not sustainable in the long run till either the oil runs out or the demand for it weakens in the wake of the growing green energy.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norway
....a result of exploiting large oil and natural gas deposits that had been discovered in the North Sea and the Norwegian Sea. Today, Norway ranks as the third wealthiest country in the world in monetary value,[10][11][12] with the largest capital reserve per capita of any nation. Norway is the world's fifth largest oil exporter,[13] and the petroleum industry accounts for around a quarter of its Gross domestic product.[14] ...
They might really be better of alone as they would have to share their riches and not much to gain...compared to a poorer country which needs the support the EU can give.
Ask Andreas Von Bulow, BB. I'm not allowed to divulge the names of those that operate in the shade ;) ;) Check the Bilderberger list :)
Anyway, Poland. They don't seem to have any participation in hidden agendas, unlike other European powers. I don't want to sound like Alex Jones here, though.
Home / History / History of Poland in 10 minutes. Really worth seeing!
