The European Union Constitution

[Antiloop33rpm]

Im surprised that no one has brought the recent 'NO' victory in France by those opposing the EU Constitution and the likely 'NEE' victory in The Netherlands that is underway at the this momment.

I find the idea of the EU very fascinating and have enjoyed watching its progress beginning in with the year before the introduction of the Euro to the present day. The idea of a unified Europe is really quite extrodinary given its historical context and to have even achieved what it has is a great human achievement.

I also find it rather useful in examining the situation in Canada (in regards to the past 35 years of struggling to keep the federalist nation together and retool it) as well as the struggle that Canada faces in the context of the American continent and the ovrwhelming power that the US exerts on member countries. On one continent, countries are coming together while here, they seem to diverging. The parallels between Dutch concerns over a more power in Brussels are often akin to the concerns that Canadians share when reflecting on Canada in the America's.

I look at the current state of Canada. Many would rather flag wave and talk about the social progression we are making and an economy that while lacking the bullish tenacity of Asian countries, is solid, ever predictable and continues along in a stead fast manner that is keeping Canada strong. However what I see is a fractured parliment where regionalism is creating a politcal landscape of West vs. Ontario vs. Quebec and Urban vs. Suburban vs. Rural. Seperatism still rages strong in Quebec and while the movement may not have the critical strength to push forward a 'Oui' vote in the next referendum it has not lost core support as many of todays youth take the place of the first generation sovereigntist that are now starting to die off. Our voting system, first-past-the-post is showing its inability to reflect the true intention of voters in more complex political situations (such as exists now). And while the recent 'hot topics' in foreign policy such as the War in Iraq, Kyoto, and missile defence have had strong support from the majority of citizens, other issues such as NAFTA, immigration, border policy and suburban sprawl leave a strong divide between people in the country.

So after all that the questions I am curious about are 'What do you think about the EU Constitution?' and 'What do you think Canada could learn from the past 50 years of European reconstruction to adress its own internal political and democratic issues as well as dealing with external issues such as its relationship with the America's?'

 

[badga416]

One interesting aspect of this is the cultural component. A lessening of borders in N. America would almost drown the differences of Canada in a united North America. Its often said that the cultural gap between a new yorker and a Torontonian are far less than the new yorker and the Texan.

In Europe the issues are more focused on economics and sovereignty (a concern Canada also has of course). Most European cultures, separated by language and long histories aren't as threatened as Canada would be in similar circumstance.

 

[bizorky]

Antiloop,

I think attemting to compare Canada to the emergence of a constitution-bound EU is extremely difficult. I don't know if it can really offer us anything practical in the narrow sense. The failure of both the populations of France and the Netherlands to accept the new constitution is a blow to the EU. One rational offered by many Dutch citizens is that they felt threatened by the potential conservativism of such a large parliamentary structure. The French voting no is a big psychological blow since France has always been a leading proponent of this constitution and the EU in general.

The constition of the EU was an attempt to draw the diverse nations of the EU even closer together. Quebec separatism is about breaking a nation apart. There is no comparison.

 

[BuildTO]

And while the recent 'hot topics' in foreign policy such as the War in Iraq, Kyoto, and missile defence have had strong support from the majority of citizens

I'm assuming what you mean is that the majority agree - not that we support the Iraq invasion or missile defence.


I've been watching the European referenda, and haven't posted about it here because I didn't think many would care. I'm very happy to see the NO side winning in France and the Netherlands. I'm actually a bit disturbed to see the right-wing racists calling NO on the basis of xenophobia, but I'm happy with the result because I see the EU only furthering capitalist globalization.

I'm also alarmed about NAFTA and Deep Integration leading to the surrendering of Canada's resources to the US, so I am wondering if the EU will result in the same kind of losses for certain countries there.

 

[Antiloop33rpm]

The constition of the EU was an attempt to draw the diverse nations of the EU even closer together. Quebec separatism is about breaking a nation apart. There is no comparison.

The reason I compared the two is because while the current EU debate is about the creation of a federalist state, the debate within Canada revolves around the dismantling (or restructuring) of it. By examining the details of the EU, its constution, parlimentary procedures and other protocol of its functioning maybe it is possible for Canada to discover new ideas and solutions in regards to how to make federalism work in a globalized and diverse nation. It was easy for Canada to make federalism work when French Canadians simpley kneeled before English Canada and followed in toe. But since the Silent Revolution, Quebec has stood strong and hard in its beliefs to protect its culture and to think that the desire and will to seperate is going to just disappear is unlikely. And with the ease at which ideas and thinking can spread across the country diversity in political thinking and ideologies is likely only going to grow more varied. Im not saying the situations are identical, only that both deal with issues of federalism and unity among diverse nations/peoples and that some of Canada's failings might be able to be fixed or better adressed by examining the EU.

I'm assuming what you mean is that the majority agree - not that we support the Iraq invasion or missile defence.

You are correct. Thats what you get for typing something while getting ready to head out.

I've been watching the European referenda, and haven't posted about it here because I didn't think many would care. I'm very happy to see the NO side winning in France and the Netherlands. I'm actually a bit disturbed to see the right-wing racists calling NO on the basis of xenophobia, but I'm happy with the result because I see the EU only furthering capitalist globalization.

Im happy with the results too. Both France and The Netherlands had strong turnout and majorities that make sure there was no second guessing what citizens thought. I also see it as telling and encouraging that both countries voted NO for reasons that diverged enough to show just how difficult it is to implement a constitution across such a diverse range of nations. This is far from a death knell to the EU Constitution but at least it has shown that citizens are not going to accept anything that will dilute further the sovereign rights of citizens in each persons respective nation and turn whole of Europe into some homeogenous EuroStates.

I'm also alarmed about NAFTA and Deep Integration leading to the surrendering of Canada's resources to the US, so I am wondering if the EU will result in the same kind of losses for certain countries there.

Well I cant comment on what will happen to the EU but here is yet another disturbing story involving Canada and its natural resources.

www.radio-canada.ca/nouve...anol.shtml

The link is Radio-Canada, thus in french, but that is only because I have been unable to find any english media coverage of the story (which I will avoid a rant against at this time). The following does however link to a March 13th story about an investment in old brewery that will be used to produce ethanol. www.talkenergy.com/articl...ead&tid=23

The Radio Canada article essentially talks about George Pataki, New York State Govenour(sp) discussing a new method to produce ethanol from the cellulose from certain tree species. Sounds great. One problem. New York does not have a large amount of forest resources. Who does? Quebec. And with natural gas having peaked and the need to replace oil and natural gas supplies becoming very urgent, guess how much pressure they are going to put on us?

Now the fact that 50% of all our Natural Gas production goes to US is disturbing enough. The fact that they have yet another reason to rape our resources in their quest for energy is even more frightening.

It is issues such as and the total lack of serious attention they receive that make me push discussion on the state of the Americas and Canada in itself as far as I can. I dont even know where to begin in trying to figure out what Canada can do to stop the US from simpley taking whatever it wants. Currently under NAFTA there seems to be little we can do. Yet I am one of the optomistic people who thinks that a solution does exist, somewhere. The EU might not provide a model by which Canada could use, but at the very least it provides proof that something that once seemed logistically and politically impossible has come into reality and made it further than most would have thought even decades ago. Maybe a fairer Canada and America's is possible one day too?

 

[bizorky]

It was easy for Canada to make federalism work when French Canadians simpley kneeled before English Canada and followed in toe. But since the Silent Revolution, Quebec has stood strong and hard in its beliefs to protect its culture and to think that the desire and will to seperate is going to just disappear is unlikely. And with the ease at which ideas and thinking can spread across the country diversity in political thinking and ideologies is likely only going to grow more varied. Im not saying the situations are identical, only that both deal with issues of federalism and unity among diverse nations/peoples and that some of Canada's failings might be able to be fixed or better adressed by examining the EU.

Please, the historical revisionism is very tired. For most people in this country now and in the past, the federalist "fact" is an issue that hardly comes popping up in people's minds on a day to day or hour by hour basis. It was (and is) easy for federalims to work because it's what people know and have known their whole life, not the result of some vast conspiracy to hold people down. If that were true, there would have been no Quiet Revolution, the Parti Quebecois would have been outlawed and the members of the FLQ executed. The french language and french culture have been allowed and encouraged to flourish in this country. More than a billions dollars a year are spent on official biligualism largely OUTSIDE the province of Quebec. That provinces derives immense benefits from being inside confederation. Anyone who insists otherwise is bent on telling only a small portion of the story.

 

[1Voltaire1]

Re: Unknown

A confederation like the European Union has a long way to go before it is analogous to anything like the Canadian federation. The way I see it the EU will never be anything more than a trading block, a monetary union, a customs union, a lose association of relatively like minded states. There are too many internal divisions within the union to ever form a coherent, unitary, external face to the world. On foreign policy, particularly the French, the contrarians that they are, seem to like to define themselves in opposition to the United States. Then you have the offshore balancers the British who like to play a mediating role between the continental mainland and the United States and often identify with the Americans. I just don't see the EU deepening the extent of its integration that much further, for all the cosmopolitan talk, many Europeans are still fundamentally quite parochial and xenophobic.

 

[1Voltaire1]

double post...

 

[samplain]

Canada is somewhere between A European administrative federation and an American ultra-national collective.