Europe and the Year of the People
There is a dirty word in Brussels. It is used to dismiss, to slap down, to end an argument. It is the word "populist". To be a populist is to be mistrusted at once, to mark yourself down as an outsider, to place yourself outside the walls of the Brussels European quarter.
I was reminded of this a few weeks back, over a story about high-earning European officials being entitled to three months off on full pay. According to reports in the Parliament, EU Commission President Barroso rejected the criticism by saying that he could not "accept populism against the European Civil Service".
Delving into speeches I discover that Brussels critics are often denounced as "populists".
According to the Cambridge dictionary, the definition of "populism" is "political ideas and activities that are intended to represent ordinary people's needs and wishes."
The alternative to "populism" is "elitism'', where a small group of high officials and professional politicians believe they know better than the people.
To a degree government in Europe is a mixture of both. It has to be. However, officials in Brussels will tell you that the EU could not have been built without an elite.
It marks out Europe as being different say from the United States.
In America power flows from the people upwards. Local elections select the heads of school boards and police chiefs. Key posts at state level are decided by the people. And it is the people who send Representatives and Senators to Washington. In many parts of Europe - and particularly in the EU - power drips from the top down.
Once, when Bill Clinton was about to go campaigning, he said "I'm off to see the people who hired me". You're unlikely to hear EU commissioners uttering such words.
Now I digress because in Europe the so-called "populists" spot a new cause. It is migration and North Africa. On Friday the European heads of government will meet in Brussels. Libya will be on the agenda. One of the key parts of their discussion will be on migration.
Yesterday more than 1,000 migrants landed on the tiny Italian island of Lampedusa in 14 boats. Certainly when I was there they were nearly all economic migrants from Tunisia. It does not yet appear that any have come from Libya, but surely they will. The Italian Interior Minister, Roberto Maroni, who previously had warned of a "biblical exodus", said yesterday that "Europe is being invaded".
We know how these new arrivals will be processed. We know how they will be cared for. We know that some - if they come from Libya - will be fleeing fighting and upheaval.
What we don't know is what will become of these people. Certainly - with fighting continuing - Europe has a duty of care. But longer term there will be the question: should they be allowed to settle in Europe or encouraged to return?
It is, of course, the people's question and Europe's politicians shy away from giving a direct answer. The line is that if Europe invests in North Africa then fewer people will see the need to migrate. It looks as if North African countries will be encouraged on the road to democracy with development aid and possibly an easing of visa restrictions. There could even be trade concessions. Many ideas are floating out there. Some are controversial.
So into the vacuum steps Marine Le Pen, the new leader of the National Front in France. Buoyed up by strong poll ratings she has said she may visit Lampedusa next week.
Colonel Gaddafi himself has stoked the fire. He told a French newspaper that "you will have immigration - thousands of people from Libya will invade Europe. There will be no one to stop this anymore."
And here is the dilemma. If the elite is seen to be evasive on issues that matter to ordinary people then significant numbers turn away from mainstream parties.
Over the next few weeks important decisions have to be made over the euro and how to prevent a repeat of the crisis that has threatened the single currency. Some of the ideas - wrapped up in the words "economic governance" - may involve a significant transfer of power away from nation states to Brussels. It is too early to say what the final package will look like, but if the changes are dramatic it poses again the question as to whether the people should get a say.
2011 is turning out to be the year of the people. They triumphed in Tunisia and Egypt and are on the march elsewhere. They insist on being heard and are challenging the old order. China is among the countries that fears the year of the people. It censors the internet and rounds up activists tempted to demonstrate.
Europe, because of its history, fears populism. But the challenge for mainstream politicians with North Africa is to address the people's real questions - however difficult that may be.
~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~28~RS~)
I'm 
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
GHY: "...high-earning European officials being entitled to three months off on full pay. According to reports in the Parliament, EU Commission President Barroso rejected the criticism by saying that he could not "accept populism against the European Civil Service".
So why no massive protests in Brussels, like the ones in the ME?
Should a euro no-fly zone be created first?
Complain about this comment
In America power flows from the people upwards. Really? No, no, this is just an illusion. Voters send Representatives and Senators to Washington, but the reality is PLUTOCRACY.
This is rule by the rich for the rich so that the rich can get richer. If you don't believe me, try running for politics in the United States with $500,000. You'll need millions just ot clear the gate. So, anyone can become President, eh? That's your joke of the day!
Migrants landed on the tiny Italian island of Lampedusa in 14 boats: Tunisian Migrants, not Libyan Mugrants. The Italian Interior Minister, Roberto Maroni, who previously had warned of a "biblical exodus", said yesterday that "Europe is being invaded". An interesting choice of word: "invaded". Speaks of "not wanted", "go away", "Couldn't you have drowned at sea?" - none of which he likely intended.
In my mind these people are taking reefuge, and if you were to ask them, they would express a desire to return. Would you not want to return to YOUR country - when things settle, when you life would be reasonably secure?
It's too late for Europe to invest in North Africa. What do you assume created the conditions from which flight is being taken? Who supported the "elite" of North Africa, who bribed, exploited, and accordingly, disadvantaged the poor?
With North Africa in a state of flux from Tunisia to Egypt, how exactly do the Europeans expect to get money for democracy, development & aid into the clean hands of responsible persons? Many ideas are floating, but none of them will work until after democratic elections have been held - fair, open, transparent elections - and the dove of peace finally alights in North Africa for the first time.
For the people at Lampedusa, the island’s mayor, Bernardino De Rubeis, said that unless the European Union provided more aid and opened its doors, Lampedusa and Italy are at risk of being overwhelmed. Col. Muammar el Qaddafi, the Libyan leader, appeared to be playing into such fears when he told the French newspaper, Journal du Dimanche, that if he should fall, “you will have immigration — thousands of people from Libya will invade Europe. There will be no one to stop them anymore.” I believe this is true because Gadddafi is Libya, and Libya is Gaddafi. This has been so for 42 years. The Press can write about him, lie about him, call him a "mad dog", and tell him that he has got to go, but the education, culture, tradition, wages, etc of Libyans were never problematic; so, one has to wonder who these "rebels" are and who is paying them, arming them?
2011 may turn out to be the year of the people. They have not yet triumphed in Tunisia or Egypt or Oman or Saudi Arabia...The old regime is not necessarily being challenged. e.g. Egypt is still old regime, even old faces.
At least Europe has a populist movement, a respect for its people. There have been several versions in the United States, some inspired by the Populist Party of the 1890s. This was the party of the early US populist movement in which millions of farmers and other working people successfully enacted their anti-trust agenda.
Other early populist political parties in the United States included
- the Greenback Party,
- the Progressive Party of 1924 led by Robert M. La Follette, Sr. and
- the Share Our Wealth movement of Huey Long in 1933–35.
Populism is a little force in a big, elitist United States. The 1996, 2000, 2004, and the 2008 presidential campaigns of Ralph Nader had a strong populist intent. Much of the Tea Party movement has used populist rhetoric, particularly in areas and states where Democrats are in power.
The Cato Institute in America or the CEE Council in Europe contend that the increasingly populist polarization of both Congress and the US body politic could hinder the Obama administration's plans to reform health care and revamp bank regulations.
Well there's a good excuse if I ever heard one, especially where American bank reform is so desperately needed for the financial health of the entire world.
Complain about this comment
If someone is really concerned about a situation at Lampedusa, let them call USAF at Sigonella.
But let them know you'll pay for an intervention. Just like Kuwait did.
[no more freebies, comrades!]
Complain about this comment
Around here it is reported that one in five teachers is to be sacked.
We would not need so many cuts, if any, if we were not giving billions to the totally unnecessary, worse-than-worthless "EU".
Complain about this comment
' ...It is the word "populist". To be a populist is to be mistrusted at once, to mark yourself down as an outsider, to place yourself outside the walls of the Brussels European quarter.
I was reminded of this a few weeks back, over a story about high-earning European officials being entitled to three months off on full pay. According to reports in the Parliament, EU Commission President Barroso rejected the criticism by saying that he could not "accept populism against the European Civil Service". ...'
EUpris: If I remember rightly, some of the pro-"EU" contributors here have used this word.
I believe that pro-"EU" commentators frequently use the same words and excuses for a period suggesting that they all gett heir ideas from the same source.
Presumably there is some sort of training going on - at the expense of unwilling memebers of the post-Lisbon "EU".
Complain about this comment
' ...EU Commission President Barroso rejected the criticism by saying that he could not "accept populism against the European Civil Service". ...'
EUpris: In other words he cannot accept democracy or the right of the people who are "citizens" of the "EU" to have some sort of influence over this worthless rubbish.
Complain about this comment
Mr.Hewitt, my own idle check back through these Blog debates reveals the 'populist' (as an alleged slur) tag is fondly used by many 'pro-EU' contributors.
To list a few from the last 12 months: QOT, JLuc, JorgeG1, Ptsa, Mathiasen, ChrisCamp, Benefactor, Gheryando, BluesBerry...
Generally, in the context of the various debates it was used as a 'put-down' of those of us who're 'anti-EU'.
'Populist' was particularly 'popular' whenever Immigration/Roma/Islam/Far Right/Referendum/Human Rights discussions were underway.
I notice in various replies to my contributions on the wholly dangerous & anti-Democratic EUropean Court of Justice the label 'populist' (as in Judges are so much better at deciding matters... Yeah, right, if Jean Luc says so!) for my suggestion the People might wish for their views to be taken account of was part & parcel of the defence of the ECJ.
Perhaps with Ms Hornbech, Denmark's Minister For Immigration feeling obliged to resign her post today for her department's mis-dealing with Asylum-seeking Palestinians born in her homeland we might consider her another victim of EU-Brussels 'Political Correct-populism'.
Apparently her minions ignored the Palestinians alleged Human Rights: Something I imagine was probably quite popular amongst a fair chunk of the Danish Citizen Electorate.
Such non-compliance with the elite's views on Immigrants is contrary to the decreed one-size-fits-all EU policy-brand. Therefore utterly anathema to those in authority in Brussels for whom contempt for the Popular Will of the indigenous Citizens is second only to the need to preserve at all cost the hegemony of Brussels.
Thus 'populism' as in Ireland's new PM daring to uphold his word to the Citizen Electorate and demand 'renegotiation' of the bail-out terms will be met with annoyance by Brussels where obedience to a Popular Vote is derided as accepting the Common Man/Woman has any understanding of modern policy-making.
'Popularism' has been knocked-back by Brussels throughout the last decade: E.g. the total non-Ratification of the Lisbon Treaty by the Citizens whom it affects. Or, the complete lack of consultation of the Citizens for the new EU Oversight of Financial Services, the huge EUro-zone Reserve of Funds drawn from hard-pressed Tax-Payers without their consent, never mind the creation of an EU President and a Foreign Service!
And, as Mr Hewitt alludes, if the Commission EUtocracy & EUropean Parliament members' greed-driven antics are anything to go by (with Pres Barroso' stout defence) then the idea of adopting empathic 'cuts'/'tightening the purse-strings' so very 'Popular' among the EU27 Governments for their Citizens is simply out of the question among the Brussels' elite.
Due to straitened times some National Governments are climbing on bits of the 'Populist' bandwagon, but Brussels won't respond in any meaningful manner. The last thing Brussels has in mind is actually paying attention to and enacting policies determined by the Will-of-the-People.
For 20 years post-Maastricht EU-Brussels has gone about assiduously usurping & denying the Citizens' Rights & Responsibilities: For those who actively support/work-in this anti-Democratic, corrupt, self-serving entity the notion of agreeing any form of 'populist' decision-making has long since been completely abandoned.
Indeed one could say among the EU-Brussels collective the 'populist' agenda is 'exclusivity'.
Complain about this comment
Gaddafi is sick, arrogant, anti-democratic, megalomaniac, dangerous, a waste of space and a waste of money.
The "EU" is sick, arrogant, anti-democratic, megalomaniac, dangerous, a waste of space and a waste of money.
The "EU" has not yet started bombing its "citizens". They have not had the power to do so.
They have been working on their "European Army" and their "European Gendarmes."
They have abused power they had by, amongst other things, imposing the Lisbon Treaty and increasing the wages of Eurocrats at a time when others are having to accept very painful cuts.
I consider it very possible that they will bomb their "citizens" at some time in the future when they have the means so to do.
Complain about this comment
CBW:
I've been assaulted and pummeled in MM's N. America blog for referring an Irish jingoist [certain 'John from Dublin'] to your comment #68 in "The Eurozone and the voters" thread re Ireland's 'neutrality' during WWII.
With the complainer claiming that your post was unsubstantiated, and that you regularly make wild claims without proper references.
So perhaps you'd want to properly reference your 'outrageous' claims?
[I'm scared I might be bombed otherwise]
thank you,
Complain about this comment
Re #8
EUprisoner
I wonder what will EU do if Honorable Muammar Qaddafi surives?
Complain about this comment
'A Paris court has suspended the corruption trial of France's former President, Jacques Chirac, in response to a legal challenge.
A lawyer for one of nine co-defendants had argued that it was unconstitutional to merge two cases arising from Mr Chirac's tenure as mayor of Paris.' (BBC News)
And what did you expect in view of rapidly growing Marine le Pen's popularity?
Complain about this comment
Gavin
Another thought provoking post, this time exposing the elitism of Brussels.
I also enjoyed your last post (Ireland: Time for the Celtic Rebel) and thought the debate was lively and the comments very informative.
As for this post, I agree with the comments of CBW. Populism is used as an attempted put down by the Europhiles. Europhiles are an elitist group who don't trust the electorate and who always think that they know best. That attitude goes down very badly with the descendants of the Anglo Saxons, Vikings and the Celts.
Complain about this comment
The word populism means a specific warm relation between ruler and mass. The ruler is a leader. The mass follows the leader. A way of manipulation of the masses is certain. But the spontaneous movement of people is something else.
To misinterpret the Bruxelles's denouncements is easy. Are they fear of individuals who manipulate the populi or simply of the populi? Bruxelles has been a well isolated place till now. Let us hope the deafness to the voice of people has not been contagious.
Complain about this comment
@ 2
Nothing new for the world, honestly. Think anyone can be the top man of the EU, China, Russia either? Mr. Smith can still go to Washington; it is just far more difficult in the modern age as selling your message costs millions. Even tree stumps and soap boxes have rights and ownership titles now a day... People like NYC Mayor Bloomberg can run independently of party support because of their millions, but the rest have to tow a line and gain faction support in order to pool funds or be gifted powerful appointments ... or you can just be a politically connected, smooth talking, "cult of personality", pop media sensation like our current TWO big names in politics...
"At least Europe has a populist movement, a respect for its people. ... Populism is a little force in a big, elitist United States."
I have to disagree that populism is bigger in the EU than the USA.
All I hear is how populist movements are derided and disrespected by the rest of the EU governenance. The USA has numerous populist movments and many are indeed quite small. Some deal primarily with state or local concerns and never really make it onto the national stage.
Example: Vermont of all places actually has (or had, it has been a while since I stumbled upon that one) a group centered around ceeding from the union. Ron Paul also made a populist bid in 2008. He trumped Nader in the polls if memory serves me right. The tea party started as populist but is rather hard to define now due to the splintering of groups and lack of solid structure.
----
@ 11
Berlusconi, Chirac... who is next on the corruption wagon? One can only hope.
Complain about this comment
9. At 3:55pm on 08 Mar 2011, powermeerkat wrote:
"..to your comment #68 in "The Eurozone and the voters" thread re Ireland's 'neutrality' during WWII.
With the complainer claiming that your post was unsubstantiated, and that you regularly make wild claims without proper references.
So perhaps you'd want to properly reference your 'outrageous' claims?2
First off, I'm amazed anyone bothers with my jottings, but then there's no accounting for people's tastes in food or verbiage, is there?
Second, thanks for taking time & trouble to refer to my 'contributions' elsewhere, and again, for letting me know there are issues about such posts.
I'm a tad intrigued the chap fulminating against my stuff seems to think I miss out on reference to things!?
1) I'm a veteran of the UK Paratroop Regt & did 3 tours of N.Ireland during the 'Troubles': I can't reference what I saw done, did to others etc. other than to say it was a pile of crap from start to finish and left me wondering how any Irish 'north' of the border could be classified as sane or living outside the Middle Ages (YES, it was that bad, BUT, so were we!).
2) Irish people are I'm sure generally as good, indifferent & bad as any on earth (my reference for this is surely Humanity exists everywhere).
3) As for Ireland's 'Neutrality' in WW2: Don't make me laugh! Anyone googling the era will find countless references - - I'm not going over them all again - - suffice to say my LIST on a previous Blog topic of those Irish 'in-touch'/'working'/'assisting' the cause of Fascism can be easily located.
4) I will admit I do not have a specific, validated, substantiated reference for the 'Irish' lighting Bonfires to guide the Luftwaffe: However, given the numerous allegations about such episodes (circa 1940-41) and knowing the antipathy toward Britain of some inhabitants in the 20 year old Irish Free State, plus the plethora of anecdotal accounts I see no reason to discount such villainy by a misguided few.
To put this from my perspective: In the 1970s I had a comrade shot by a sniper from the Southern Irish side of the border: It took my comrade some time to die & we couldn't get to him - - in the intervening period we saw 'Paddy' sniper get up & leave (I can't be sure, but I think he waved to us) - - the Southern Irish had been informed the moment we came under fire & it took their Garda almost a full hour to turn up.
Now, if that is the state of hatred/connivance some 50 years after 'Irish Independence' then what must it have been like in 1940!?
End of reference.
Cheers.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
2 BluesBerry
As usual an excellent and thoughtful contribution.
Complain about this comment
#8 - EUprisoner209456731
"Gaddafi is sick, arrogant, anti-democratic, megalomaniac, dangerous, a waste of space and a waste of money.
The "EU" is sick, arrogant, anti-democratic, megalomaniac, dangerous, a waste of space and a waste of money".
Whereas you, of course, are of inestimable value.
Complain about this comment
#7 CBW
-- sorry ´poppuist ´is not a word I use -
--I don´t even know how to spell it !
-- ´elite´-- is a different story.
Complain about this comment
Forgive me for asking but, before one can participate in an elite, does one not need some kind of qualification?
The biggest single problem with the EU at present is the dismally low standard of management and if, as you suggest, management is top downwards in the EU, that simply serves to demonstrate what a bunch of dismal failures we collectively have dumped on the summit of Olympus.
The very least one can expect from an elite - self-appointed or otherwise - is some semblance of intellectual superiority over we minions. I cannot think of a single leader who could be taken seriously in such a context. If this project is to progress, we need to get rid of an entire generation of intellectual lightweights who, in our state of dismal indifference, we were dumb enough to elect in the first place. Until we do so, the whole idea of 'elitism' lacks the fundamental prerequisite - the existence of an elite.
Complain about this comment
This is off topic so I will not dwell on it but what a shame that the previous thread should have been closed for comment after #206 Justin150 had posted such an intelligent and thought provoking comment.
Complain about this comment
Maybe you missed 2008 when the US congress decided that after they had facilitated the banks and investment firms in robbing the treasury and the personal wealth of the people they decided to bail the banks out by using tax revenues...hardly populist. The bureaucrats in the US generally find advanced remuneration through leaving their agencies and working for the private sector regulated by such agencies. Senior bureaucrats in the US government are not hurting. The law making process in the US is by lobbyist of big business and banking...Congress is a cesspool of corruption. Although the EU bureaucrats possess a sense of entitlement that is unjustified there is some middle ground that should be found. The current pressures being applied by the private sector and conservatives is to create workforces in the West that can compete with the Chinese in salaries and benefits. There is this disturbing sense that everyone should work from birth to death with no chance of retirement in any form that might be comfortable..anything above subsistence. The consolidation of wealth and the lack of representation of the needs of the people by elected bodies in the US and EU leaves the average worker in a state of serfdom..no security and unable to gain some salary reflecting the benefit to others for their efforts.
The EU is just another layer of bureaucracy and everyone should have known that going in. They see themselves as the Brahman of the bureaucratic caste system. Unfortunately, the bankers and big business that benefit from the actions of the bureaucracies pay little to maintain them. The greed of the past decade and the attitudes that facilitated it all remain.
Complain about this comment
Broadly speaking, populism is the process why which you appeal to those who do not give a damn who runs the country so she long as she has a nice breasts. That arises as a direct consequence of people who prefer comics to newspapers by a proportion or 100 to 1. You have only yourselves to blame.
Complain about this comment
Re #19
Tosh & gibberish: You've used 'populist' a number of times in the past 2 years.
Complain about this comment
20. At 9:55pm on 08 Mar 2011, threnodio_II wrote:
Forgive me for asking but, before one can participate in an elite, does one not need some kind of qualification?"
Elite = can be the 'best', but is also the noun for "a select group or class" (Oxford Dict.) & I at least always refer to the EU-Brussles' apparatchiks/EUtocracy/jobsworth with that second 'few' in mind.
Totally agree on the paucity of genuine intellect never mind Statesmanship amongst the post-Maastricht ruling-set. Then again, one is hardly surprised: Afterall, the last thing those EU status-quo lackeys/toadies need is someone to come along with the idea of re-making or re-inventing a EUropean Union that is answerable to the People.
My lord! What a 'populist' sentiment!
I can hear them all being sick into their Chablis buckets within their Allowances-paid for select quarter penthouses & exclusive up-market pied a terre as the notion is proposed.
Complain about this comment
2. At 1:27pm on 08 Mar 2011, BluesBerry wrote:
Easy for once to agree with MHoward: You wrote a very interesting piece.
Of course I take issue with quite a bit of it, but especially this, "..You'll need millions just ot clear the gate. So, anyone can become President, eh? That's your joke of the day!"
I accept the geenral inference that the 'money' must be there, however, 'William Jefferson Clinton' would seem to have bucked the trend at his first Election.
So far as I can tell from reading on his Presidential Campaign & from his own memoirs the son of a very broken home would appear to have made it to the White House on merit & 'populist' sentiment.
Am prepared for You to prove otherwise.
Cheers.
Complain about this comment
#26 CBW
Complain about this comment
#26 CBW:
Not sure how #27 happened, but chalk it up to operator error. Sorry.
You are right about Mr. Clinton's humble beginnings. But many US presidents over the last 60 years had similarly humble beginnings. A few more you could have mentioned: Harry Truman, Dwight Eisenhower, Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, and Ronald Reagan. Hey, that's most of them, isn't it. So what is BluesBerry talking about?
Complain about this comment
@23 threnodio_II
"Broadly speaking, populism is the process why which you appeal to those who do not give a damn who runs the country so she long as she has a nice breasts. That arises as a direct consequence of people who prefer comics to newspapers by a proportion or 100 to 1. You have only yourselves to blame."
Most cases of so-called populism nowadays are serious fears and problems of real people which are picked up by a mere few politicians who are subsequently denounced as populists. Be it immigration, islam, EU, EMU.
@article
"2011 is turning out to be the year of the people. They triumphed in Tunisia and Egypt and are on the march elsewhere. They insist on being heard and are challenging the old order. China is among the countries that fears the year of the people. It censors the internet and rounds up activists tempted to demonstrate."
Half of the pictures I have seen so far regarding those ominous Chinese demonstrations were shot in Taiwan.
The next half shows more policemen than actual protestants.
And even though China does indeed tighten up security measures, to expect any kind of revolution would be absolutely unrealistic. Pro-democracy and anti-government groups or movements are much to diverse and heterogenous and far too small in size.
Words such as democracy, freedom of the press, rule of law sound nice and all .
But to most Chinese they are meaningless compared to stability and growing wealth.
Complain about this comment
"The UK and France are working on a UN Security Council resolution for a no-fly zone [over Libya], however Russia has already stated its opposition to military intervention." (BBC)
As if anybody ever expected that China would vote for it.
Complain about this comment
Re #15...
"the Taoiseach Éamon de Valera signed the book of condolence on Adolf Hitler’s death, on May 2, 1945, and personally visited Ambassador Hempel, following standard protocol on the death of a Head of State with an embassy in Ireland. President Douglas Hyde visited Hempel separately on 3 May.[30] At the time the Third Reich was about to surrender unconditionally."
CBW, I suspect that your mentioning that episode alone might have been considered offensive by some.
Perhaps certain potentially offensive facts [such as, e.g, Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact and its Secret Protocol] should be edited out from history, or replaced with their more palatable versions, just like certain words/terms are being edited out or replaced now with 'less offensive' ones in some new editions of Mark Twain's novels.
Complain about this comment
Re #29 "Half of the pictures I have seen so far regarding those ominous Chinese demonstrations were shot in Taiwan.
The next half shows more policemen than actual protestants."
And one couldn't see any Catholic demonstrators at all.
A least in PRC. ;-)
Complain about this comment
Yes, Chirac's trial has been suspended, but on the other hand
"French police have found stolen jewellery worth 18m euros ($25m; £15m) hidden in a drain in a Paris suburb.[...]
The thieves - two of whom were disguised as women - stormed the shop near the Champs-Elysee in December 2008 and stole nearly all its valuables.
They spoke French and another language..." (BBC)]
And what language was it? Esperanto?
Complain about this comment
Margaret Howard not withstanding, I did not agree with Mr. Bluesberry's ..hallucenegic (sp?..oh well) imaginative contribution.
But, M. Howard thinks with her emotions and "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" way--her freedom to do so of course.
But, China is not this or that, it should be given some respect. And Mr. Bluesberry, If you think China is a probably postive contributor to the world in future and present, I probably agree with you.
BUT, your Anti-USA rants sound almost paid for of they have been gotten out of a book of nonsensical nationalistic propaganda--"The Big Lie"
...you should be ashamed of such old fashioned low rent opinions given--now get on with your pograms or purges.
Also, I do disagree with you, M. Howard--about Russians and their past.
Would *lucky You* who have grown up in Western Europe Been So Bold as to defy the Communists of the Soviet Union during the bad times of Stalin?
Or would you have quietly done things that would stain your soul just to survive?
I do not know what I would have done. No offense meant, but, its just think about.
Terroristic practices were perfected under Hitler and his cohort (sorry WebAlice) the "less hated" Stalin. They terrified Russians into doing and believing whatever they wanted them to do or think.
They imprisoned and killed all or most of the doctors in the USSR in the 50s just because Mr. Stalin was scared of doctors and of their neutral non political ...science? I do not know the history exactly, but it was without any purpose but to terrorize the population.
I'm afraid of what I would do in any situation like that except to back away slowly ....and finally across borders, I guess.
Complain about this comment
BTW, Alice is an example of "living well is the best revenge."
Alices little country palace with balcony and garden...
Complain about this comment
Cambridge Dictionary:
Populist; representing or connected with the ideas and opinions of ordinary people.
There is something fundamentaly wrong with an ostensibly democratic institution where populist is a term of insult.
There have been many posts on this site making claims as to the undemocratic nature of the EU. There have been any number of counter claims by EU supporters that the EU institutions are in fact more democratic than the British institutions. Although there is much to be said on this subject I wish for the moment to simply state that irrespective of the degree of democracy prevailing in the EU there is a substantial proportion of the British populous that perceive the EU to be undemocratic and elitist.
I consider that at least part of this issue rests with the European parliament. When the British elect their MPs, these MPs who are directly elected by the masses then set the political agenda for the parliament. In the case of the European parliament it is not the MEPs who define the political agenda. In a sense MEPs are like the court eunuchs in imperial China; they possess a large amount of political influence but they are by no means in charge. I think that there is a fundamental mismatch between the degree of influence that the British populous expect an MEP to have and the degree of influence they actually have over the direction of the EU.
Would matters not be improved if EU power rested with the European parliament? Would the EU lose its elitist image if the publics directly elected representatives decided on the political direction of the EU? Is there any actual need for the Commission or the Council of the European Union?
I suggest doing away with the Commission and Council of the European Union and simply having the European Parliament in charge with the European Council working as a second chamber with the power to reject legislation from the Parliament. All legislative initiative should rest with the European Parliament, the unanimous agreement of the European Council being necessary for the legislation to become law.
I now wait to be shot down in flames....
Complain about this comment
I need help and this is not a joke so can we be serious?
Does anyone know the correct form of address for a group of ministers - in this case all 27 foreign ministers?
Thanks.
Complain about this comment
"In America power flows from the people upwards. Local elections select the heads of school boards and police chiefs. Key posts at state level are decided by the people. And it is the people who send Representatives and Senators to Washington. In many parts of Europe - and particularly in the EU - power drips from the top down. "
Exactly.
In America (and UK) they have a common law legal system and in EU they have a civil code legal system. That is why in USA power is with the people and lent up and in EU the power is held at the top and if we are lucky a little bit drips down
Complain about this comment
37. At 08:18am on 09 Mar 2011, threnodio_II wrote:
"Does anyone know the correct form of address for a group of ministers - in this case all 27 foreign ministers?"
Thren, I'm fairly certain there isn't a collective noun for such a group.
Presuming You're planning to write addressing all 27 I would suggest something along the lines of that more commonly used for Ambassadors, i.e. 'Your Excellencies', 'Your esteemed Ministers', 'Messrs Foreign Ministers', or make it up as in, 'Your Ministers of Foreign Affairs'.
Ironically, in original form the term 'Minister' was literally an 'inferior person' (Latin 'minus'), in opposition to 'magister', a 'superior personage' (Latin 'magis').
That aside why not in the case of the EU27 simply address them as they so thoroughly deserve, 'You fawning, duplicitous, conniving bunch of...'
Cheers.
Complain about this comment
36. At 07:31am on 09 Mar 2011, Ulkomaalainen wrote:
"..I suggest doing away with the Commission and Council of the European Union and simply having the European Parliament in charge with the European Council working as a second chamber with the power to reject legislation from the Parliament. All legislative initiative should rest with the European Parliament, the unanimous agreement of the European Council being necessary for the legislation to become law..."
No need for any shots being fired at what is a worthy idea for consideration.
Nevertheless, You join the ever-increasing list of 'pro-EU' Commentators on this Blog who propose all sorts of amendments/alternatives etc. to the present tyrannical EU-Brussels frame-work and seemingly wholly missing the vital point there is no chance this side of the Galaxy of the EU-Brussels elite giving up their anti-Democratic, corrupt, gravy-train existence in order to better serve the Citizens of Europe.
IMO, this decade the EU-Brussels will either adopt a liberating Reformist approach that returns ther Rights & Responsibilities to the Citizens as You would prefer or there will be serious Civil unrest across the Continent & probably the British Isles.
From my penultimate paragraph You will know I am somewhat pessimistic on the 'approach' the over-bearing, duplicitous EU-Brussels will undertake.
Complain about this comment
After reading Threnodio's post 20 about the poor quality of the EU leaders, I googled Lady Ashton wiki and read that she had worked as an advisor to communist groups early on in her career and recently had reconstructive surgery. I have to admit feeling a bit guilty as now I understood why her peculiar, rather rugged appearance. Then I noticed since I am in Poland, I was reading a Google translation from Polish ... after switching to wiki english, the "communist" references became "community" and the surgery references fortunately disappeared. That aside, Threnodio is quite correct and this character or caricature, Lady (Tottington) Ashton, is probably the EU's most dismal example of EU governance.
Complain about this comment
Re #36 Ulkomaalainen: "I now wait to be shot down in flames...."
That wouldn't be me.
I don't use AK-47, Degtarevs, Czechoslovak era SEMTEX (bought en mass by Gaddafi for a later distribution to assorted ME 'freedom fighters'), Strelas, or even a crude TT.
Don't fly them MiG 29s, SU-27s or any MiL-s either.
Nay, I've never even invaded Finland during the Winter War.
Let alone after Schengen.
[I'm at 12; look at your 6!]
Complain about this comment
threnodio_II wrote:
I need help and this is not a joke so can we be serious?
Does anyone know the correct form of address for a group of ministers - in this case all 27 foreign ministers?
If your name is Jose Manuel Barroso from the bankrupt Portugal it might be: 'Hey! Yo!'
[a respectful response: "Comrade Commissar? How high we jump?"]
Complain about this comment
The EU would not have developed so quickly if it had relied exclusively on populism, rememberer its a post Second World War institution designed to foster peace and prosperity in what might otherwise be warring nations and has has done a good job thus far. As far as accountability is concerned, it probably doesn't answer in the same way as a first past the post system such as the UK.Its difficult to assess therefore which is the more successful. Accountability at a personal level is my definition of populism- how free you are as an individual and what rights do you have for example to stand up to a bureaucracy.It would be interesting to know whether a citizen in France felt more in control of his own life as compared to someone in Britain or Germany.Do the people in those countries regard the authorities as a benign and helpful or a necessary intrusion to be put up with? You can be sure the answers would not be the same as a resident of Tripoli.
Complain about this comment
Many European countries themselves have an inbred tendency to elitism and social engineering, including and maybe especially the UK (under both Labour and now the Coalition). So is it surprising that a body such as the EU and European Commission whose leading players are appointed by elite social engineers has created a elitist bureaucracy set on social engineering? The issues that increasing divides the EU and will lead to its demise along with the especially elitist and nonsensical Euro is fundamentally based on one group of elites opposing another group of elites. Its a club of elites and that is how they like it at the moment. Truly elected officials with responsibility and direct accountability to the people is unthinkable! Referendums on key issues sents a Eurocrat and domestic politiciam shivering. Ultimately the EU will collapse under the weight of its own costs, bureaucracy and irrelevancy - like the old Soviet Union!
Complain about this comment
Preaching to the choir. Nice to see the gang is all here.
Complain about this comment
Gavin - Language evolves. The dictionary definition you quoted does not match the way the word is now used.
To quote from the Wiki site you may have seen "contemporary populists rarely call themselves ‘populists’ and usually reject the term when it is applied to them by others."
It seems that as an emotionally positive adjective, the word "populist" is now dead. So let us redefine the word and accept that it is an insult. I would suggest that a definition which coincides with current usage is "To appeal to popular emotion rather than reason and fact."
We can then start discussing whether use of the word is reasonable in specific instances. Note that I am not taking sides in the pro/anti European religious debate which occupies so much of the discussion on this blog. :-)
Complain about this comment
#45. At 10:33am on 09 Mar 2011, Niall Firinne
True, the functionaries are being considered an elite in many EU countries and I recall that the special EU car licence plates that EU functionaries could use to matriculate their vehicles are rarely seen these days since the cars got attacked in Brussels.
I'm also minded that the civil service elite seems to reign in the UK parliament whereby the establishment is credited with an endless stream of leaks that ensure a disliked minister is removed. What a shame that in the EU's case such leaks would result in the leaker being accused of treason and being hung, drawn and quartered, were that to be allowed by the ECHR of course.
Complain about this comment
#37. At 08:18am on 09 Mar 2011, threnodio_II wrote:
"I need help and this is not a joke so can we be serious?
Does anyone know the correct form of address for a group of ministers - in this case all 27 foreign ministers?"
Good question, I'm minded to agree with CBW but then words like eminence, excellence sound more suitable for third world members of state who go overboard on pomp and ceremony. I suspect that just "dear ministers" might be sufficient or maybe even "dear right honourable ministers" but whether you use the word "right" is open to discussion as it infers a status, but then these are senior ministers.
Complain about this comment
I assume the greatest political leaders would be pious, live to serve their people, transparent in their actions, live frugally or at least in balance with the people they serve, and shun pomp or praise as being the tools of the egotistic.
I assume all of those who desire to serve would be so honest as they take their first baby steps along this path but unfortunately it turns into a greasy pole and to succeed, to be handed the reins of elite power you must be the exact opposite of those ideals which would serve the people so well and once the money comes pouring in well who could control their snout and pull it from the trough.
Can anyone square that circle and still be a member of the human race?
Complain about this comment
I feel frustrated by this post of Gavin.
The frustration comes mainly from his use of the word "populism".
In French, the term is much more pejorative than "political ideas and activities that are intended to represent ordinary people's needs and wishes", but rather "Tendance politique à exploiter les aspirations populaires" (ultralingua online - le Petit Robert charges - fools). The key word is "exploiter", which has a negative connotation.
Brussels may be shifting to English, but concepts like these originate from French. There, populism has no democratic credentials, but is akin to "poujadism", i.e. taking political positions to garner public support, but in order to abuse it for own personal gain, and twist the purpose of democracy. It is worse than e.g. "tabloid politics", and has a whiff of fascism about it.
It's like using the word "collaboration". Perfectly fine in English, but heavily tainted on the continent, which prefers "cooperation" or something like it.
So I think Gavin made a big mistake by using the Cambridge dictionary - and it affects the debate quite seriously.
Do your homework a bit better next time Gavin, or else acknowledge that you're taking a political position.
None of this to refute the possibility that some people in Brussels may consider themselves an elite. Anyone who has participated in the concours, knows how hard it is to qualify as an EU civil servant. While the selection process is tough and demanding, it does not excuse elitism (if there is any) later on.
But to be very clear: resisting "populism" is NOT a sign of elitism, and Gavin is misrepresenting the situation here.
Complain about this comment
The joke of the day:
The EU foreign affairs chief, Baroness Ashton, has told Euro MPs that Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi should be "sent back into the cold".
She was speaking at a passionate debate in Strasbourg in which MEPs heard calls for a no-fly zone and for opening borders to refugees.
And who, dear Baroness from Labour is going to actually do that?
And with what?
Complain about this comment
Sasha Clarkson wrote:
Gavin - Language evolves. The dictionary definition you quoted does not match the way the word is now used.
It seems that as an emotionally positive adjective, the word "populist" is now dead.
You may want to look up 'snafu', Sasha.
Much more appropriate and useful.
Complain about this comment
EUprisoner209456731 wrote:
' ...EU Commission President Barroso rejected the criticism by saying that he could not "accept populism against the European Civil Service". ...'
"EUpris: In other words he cannot accept democracy or the right of the people who are "citizens" of the "EU" to have some sort of influence over this worthless rubbish."
I think the implications are far, far more serious than a mere rejection of democracy and pubic sentiment.
It is true, the EU is anti democratic. it always has been. But that only tells us what it is not. It does not shed light on what it is. And if you want to know what it will do next, you need to know and understand what it is, not what it is against.
So what "is" the EU? If these people don't believe in popularism, what is their ideological bent?
To answer that, I think you need to look at how it was founded, and by whom, and you need to understand what those people believe, in ideological terms.
So the EU was founded by a pan European aristocracy. That is not a euphemism for an elite group, it is the precise description of the facts. Most Europeans will ask "What aristocracy? We did away with the aristocracy long ago."
But this is very far from reality. You can check the facts. The people who were invited to the seminars and counsels that begat the EU were titled aristocrats. They were Dukes, Barons, Princes and Lords. Crucially, this is what they call themselves, and what THEY DEMAND OTHERS CALL THEM. And it was this criteria which allowed one to take part in the creation of the EU.
So what did the EU do, in the end?
Well, the vast majority of all the money that has ever flowed through the EU has been CAP money. It is tax revenue taken from member state governments, and distributed to the land owners (poor farmers) of Europe. And low and behold, it was the aristocracy of Europe who were the overwhelming beneficiaries of this policy. I mean, we are not talking about small biscuits here. We are talking big, big money. It was taken from the tax revenue of states, and distributed to the aristocracy of Europe, and this was achieved by way of "institutions" that were created and staffed by the very same aristocrats who benefited from the windfall.
The EU, in short, is a mechanism through which the aristocracy enrich themselves from the public revenues of the states of Europe. That is its historical function, if you are talking about how it affected people and money.
If how the EU affected people and money is not important, then one can talk for hours and hours about the other great things the EU has done. Or not. I mean, you inevitably end up in pointless arguments about whether the future might have been this way or that, and in the final analyses you can't win that argument, because nobody can predict the future, even in retrospect. So all the EU elite had to do was claim that their efforts created all the goodness in the world, and not enough of the EU created all the evil. It is handy argument, not least because it is so purely speculative that it defies debate. So if you chant and chant this message enough, it becomes useful dogma and propaganda.
But if the money is important, then the debate is a lot easier to understand. You just look at who created it, and who benefited financially. "Qui bono?" is perhaps the oldest method of rational investigation known. If you want to know why things happened, you ask yourself "Who benefits?"
And if you accept the facts of what the EU is and has been, in financial terms, it becomes easier to answer the interesting question of what these people believe, and thus what they will do next. And that is useful analyses, for everyone.
So what these aristocrats believe, most clearly, is that they are entitled to tax revenue without being exposed to the uncertainties of the free market. Let us be clear about that. Whatever else the CAP is, it is fundamentally a subsidy to business owners that protects them from market forces. Whether it is good or bad or merely irrelevant to you doesn't change that fact.
And why is that important? Well, it tells you something about Europe's aristocracy, and what they believe. They believe they are entitled to treat public revenue as their own property. they believe they are entitled to be treated differently from ordinary people, who are not so entitled. So in effect, they fundamentally do not believe in human equality, or the concept that everyone is to be treated equally by the laws of the state.
So they do not believe in the rule of law. They believe in some modern variety of feudalism, which is the word we use to describe aristocracies which do not entertain the rule of law.
Now whether you have someone who believes in communist feudalism (or godless feudalism) like Barroso, or whether you have someone who believes in the divine right of superior bloodlines to rule the feudal society (feudalism with god), is largely immaterial. It really doesn't matter much, as far as common people are concerned, whether they are made slaves to a superior rank of human being by the communist party, or by the church. Feudalism is feudalism, and the rule of law is the rule of law.
And if you wish to predict how Europe will evolve under feudal rule, you are in the happy position of being enriched by a massive historical record of how that turned out previously. I believe the popular term is the "dark ages", although from the point of view of priests and the aristocratic families they assisted, this was a golden age of enterprise. The dark ages were the period in which feudalism cemented itself on Europe, and from whence the grand houses of the european aristocracy were born.
So that is what the EU is, and how can expect it to behave. It is a wonderful thing, if you believe in feudalism.
If you don't think feudalism is a good idea, the question is how much of it you will put up with before you try to do something about it.
I have said before that Europe cannot progress until it becomes dangerous, not merely embarrassing, to ask people to address you by your special aristocratic title.
The man or woman who demands to be addressed by their title is telling you they wish to enslave you, and your children. This person is telling you they are a superior form of life, and that they will decide your fate as if you were a farm animal. They are telling you that they honestly believe they are entitled to own you as their property, and that this is gods will.
Until this sort of ideology is so hated, and so attacked by ordinary people, that is becomes dangerous to utter it in public, Europe cannot move forward into the enlightened age of basic literacy and the rule of law.
To demand the right to a title is to declare war on fundamental human rights, and to preach feudalism and the ownership of human beings by a cabal of phony priests and wise men.
Until that public declaration of war on the rule of law becomes provocation excusing violence from those so disadvantaged by it, feudalism is an acceptable ideology for the aristocracy, and for the EU.
Complain about this comment
#37
I think your question illustrates one point Gavin makes. "Minister" originally means "servant".
In a meritocratic democracy, these people are not better or different than anyone else, they just happen to carry a lot of responsibility and power (for which they must give account).
Just address them as you would address any other assembly of 27 women and men.
Complain about this comment
Hi Gavin
I think that you have a point with your article that democracy is not at the heart of the EU. However other matters are pressing as the peripheral Euro zone nations are under pressure again today and bond yields are rising to new highs.
I did see a possible cause on the excellent notayesmanseconomics blog.
"The Greek newspaper Kathimerini reported this yesterday about Greek budget revenues.
Compared with the first two months of 2010, revenues declined this year by 9.2 percent…………the shortfall exceeding 870 million euros after the February goal was missed by 595 million."
Not quite the official story is it?
Complain about this comment
threnodio_II wrote:
"I need help and this is not a joke so can we be serious?
Does anyone know the correct form of address for a group of ministers - in this case all 27 foreign ministers?
Thanks."
"Goon squad." is the compassionate term, I believe.
Perhaps "commissariat" is more useful for your purposes? Traditionally, before the soviet union adopted the term for widespread use, it meant:
"A department of an army in charge of providing food and other supplies for the troops."
So that fits the bill brilliantly, in my view,
Complain about this comment
#53. At 12:17pm on 09 Mar 2011, powermeerkat,
The acronym is indeed an interesting one and aptly describes the politics of many a country.
Complain about this comment
#54. At 12:20pm on 09 Mar 2011, democracythreat
An interesting dissitation and certainly there is a lot of truth in what you've said, however where in your potted history of the EU do the politicians fit in as whilst some do have links to the aristocracy, many do not. Do you consider the politicians to be just wannabe's into a feudal system, or incompetent pawns of titled people, or collaborators in a dire plot similar to the French Vichy government.
Complain about this comment
#54 the point about the CAP is well made. This was a policy that did make sense for about 10-15 after the end of WWII where food security was important but has ceased to have any commercial or economic justification since then.
I would go further than you and say that the CAP is a totally immoral policy that has condemned (together with its equally immoral American equivalent) millions to subsidence farming, poverty and starvation.
I wonder if any pro-EU poster is willing to defend it? Is the point of the EU to transfer money from ordinary people to landowners?
Complain about this comment
Gavin said:
"According to the Cambridge dictionary, the definition of "populism" is "political ideas and activities that are intended to represent ordinary people's needs and wishes.""
According to the Cambridge dictionary, the defintion of "elite" is "The richest, most powerful, best educated or best trained group in a society"
Just as we can focus on the positive aspects of populism and pretend the negative aspects don't exist, so we can of...
...you know what, can't be bothered.
I'm going back to the Daily Mail, there funnier to read and more fun to wind up.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This could be the Year of the People in Europe.
EU Commission President Barroso may have said that he cannot "accept populism against the European Civil Service", but populism is not a dirty word. Populism is what keeps the economy moving. "Populism" is "political ideas and activities that are intended to represent ordinary people's needs and wishes." Populists should be the beloved of the elites that after all ride populists' backs.
Officials in Brussels will tell you that the EU could not have been built without an elite, but I dare them to tell me that the EU could not have been built without the workers, the common folk.
In America power flows from the people upwards. Not true.
In American you have a system of Government that better approximates a plutocracy: rule by the rich, for the rich, in order to make the elite richer. Votes may send Representatives and Senators to Washington, but thereafter the representation of the people comes to a halt...and the whims of the financial elite take over; this is why American banking reform will never be worth the paper that it is written upon.
Of all the migrants landing on the Island of Lampedusa, most are Tunisian: It does not yet appear that any have come from Libya. This is an interesting fact, certainly worth pondering further.
Over the next few weeks important decisions have to be made over the euro and how to prevent a repeat of the crisis that has threatened the single currency.
2011 may indeed by the Year of the People, not just because of North Africa and the Middle East, but because MEPs have at last put together the details and are ready to tackle a financial transaction tax.
In fact, European Union lawmakers have given STRONG backing to the introduction of a financial transaction tax in Europe, feasibility study underway. A recent vote in the European Parliament was overwhelmingly in favour of the idea, with 529 votes for and only 127 against.
Algirdas Semeta, EU Taxation Commissioner, said he believed such a tax was necessary at a global level to help fund international challenges, such as climate change, immigration, and social development.
Commission officials are due to present their final conclusions on the various options for taxing the financial sector by this summer. They are also considering a financial activities tax, as well as a financial transaction tax, among the possibilities.
So far "the people" have suffered austerity, job loss, insecurity, etc. when in fact, it was the financial institutions too big to fail and with far too little regulation that caused the economic collapse with their nefarious financial instruments.
I say: TIME FOR THESE INVESTMENT BANKS TO GIVE BACK.
What say you?
Complain about this comment
Buzet23 wrote:
"#54. At 12:20pm on 09 Mar 2011, democracythreat
An interesting dissitation and certainly there is a lot of truth in what you've said, however where in your potted history of the EU do the politicians fit in as whilst some do have links to the aristocracy, many do not. Do you consider the politicians to be just wannabe's into a feudal system, or incompetent pawns of titled people, or collaborators in a dire plot similar to the French Vichy government."
Rather than, listen to me repeat my opinions, I feel you would be better served to check the facts for yourself.
It is not easy to find out who was invited to the seminars that founded the EU. I accept that. It is not easy to establish who founded the political parties who dominate the administration of most european state. I concede the point that this research is not easy.
But the information is out there, if you look. If you know how to look.
So, look. I think you will amazed. I certainly was.
Start by researching the seminars that founded the EU project in Rome. See if you can trace the information trial to the individuals who came and participated.
What amazed me was the total absence of non titled persons. While political party membership is theoretically open to commoners in Europe (good luck progressing without funding), the creation of the EU was strictly a titled affair.
This is why I say that the problem is one of ideology, at its heart. It is not a mere co-incidence that the aristocracy happened to be well represented in the crowd that created the EU. They did it, and only they did it, because it benefited them, and served their ideological purposes. The EU is every bit as ideologically driven as the communist regimes of the soviet union.
Which is no doubt why it was so readily agreeable to those worthies.
Complain about this comment
#39 - cool_brush_work
Well I knew I was asking for trouble the moment I asked the question. At least you were gracious enough to give an answer. No this is not a letter, it is a direct address. The FCO suggests 'gentlemen', which rules out most of them either on the grounds that they could not find a suitably qualified male or because those that are male do not fall into that category.
The best I can come up with is 'Oi! You lot - listen up'. I will let you know how it goes.
Complain about this comment
Elitist: someone who believes that those in power know better and should make all the decisions. In a politician, rule without listening to the public.
Populist: someone who believes in listening to public opinion. In a politician, one who believes in appearing to listen to public opinion, while, in fact, doing everything to manipulate it to his personal advantage.
An elitist sits well in the European Commission and a populist works well in a local nationalist party. However, the two types are not mutually exclusive. Tell me: was Hitler a populist an elitist or both?
Complain about this comment
#40 - cool_brush_work
". . . there is no chance this side of the Galaxy of the EU-Brussels elite giving up their anti-Democratic, corrupt, gravy-train existence in order to better serve the Citizens of Europe."
Oh yes there is. Instead of staying away from elections and using that as a pathetic excuse for nobody being interested, get out there and vote for someone else. You are not allowed to vote for or against the Barossos, Ashtons and Rompuys of this world. Time to dump the governments who chose them in the first place.
Complain about this comment
#64. At 1:39pm on 09 Mar 2011, democracythreat
I'm sure you are probably correct and I will look just out of personal interest but the trail I'm more interested in now is just 'who benefits' at the current time. We know the CAP has been reduced to about 40% which obviously has meant a drop in funds to the aristocracy, we also know France receives 19% of the CAP the last time I checked. If the EU was created by aristocracy for their benefit it would seem that the balance of power has shifted to include others. Do you have any theories on just who?
Complain about this comment
Manneken,
My removed post #62 was almost certainly removed because I cut and pasted alternative definitions of the word populism in French from the LaRousse, which is after all the primary source for the French language. In none of their definition alternatives do they come up with the definition you listed in #51 and neither do they use the verb 'exploiter'.
Complain about this comment
#64 - democracythreat
#68 - Buzet23
Please gentlemen. You can blame the legacy of European aristocracy for a lot of things but not the CAP. No German government of modern times that I can think of could have survived without the FDP in the coalition. Conventionally - although the last government was an exception - this hs been rewarded by the foreign affairs portfolio. Indeed, the current foreign minister, Westerwelle is the leader of the party.
FDP has represented Bavarians primarily and more especially farmers who have about as much chance of running profitable businesses as flying to Mars on a pig. Of course, everyone else has jumped on the bandwagon from people with a handful of olive trees hanging off a cliff edge to the whole of France. In the meantime, while much of the world goes hungry, landowners are being paid to turn some of the most productive land in Europe into theme parks and golf courses but actually, for once, the landed gentry is fighting a rearguard action and continuing to farm.
This is why I become so angry when the illiterati post garbage about the CAP, the Royal Family and Sandringham. There are no favours being shown and no cheap underhand tricks. It is a viable business and they claim nothing to which they are not entitled. The status of the owners is completely irrelevant.
Complain about this comment
Ruling elites only deride and insult what they see as a real or potential threat to their rule. If the EU regularly derides 'Populists', it is because they are gaining traction. They are now posing a threat to the EU elite.
Rulers don't continualy insult things they think are pathetic or irrelevant. They just ignore them.
Complain about this comment
Seems to me that they're afraid at the BBC that Cameron's going to further slash their funding. Mr. Hewitt, you are quite aware how intellectually dishonest your blogpost was, so I won't go on about that, but it would be nice if you would just admit that you dislike the European Union, instead of trying to keep the veneer of BBC-journalism around you. Frankly, it's sort of embarrassing. I'm going to stick to Jean Quatremer's blog from now, It's far more informative about what's going on at EU-level than just random questions that are only posited to further a general opinion. It would be nice if you dared to go into a little more detail every now and again.
Complain about this comment
@ 70. At 2:56pm on 09 Mar 2011, threnodio_II wrote:
"FDP has represented Bavarians..."
Since when?
The only party that really represents Bavarians is the CSU, sister party of Merkel's CDU.
Start again...!!!
Complain about this comment
British no-smoking day today.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-tobacco_movement_in_Nazi_Germany
http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/takala/040907
http://mymoratorium.wordpress.com/2007/09/15/anti-smoking-nazis/
Complain about this comment
#70 Threnodio
"Please gentlemen. You can blame the legacy of European aristocracy for a lot of things but not the CAP."
--- Britain will stay in the EU --- ONLY because of the CAP for its aristocracy !
-- Havent´t you learned anything about functioning British Feudalism ?
Complain about this comment
Dear Adolf and Mussolini, yours "political ideas and activities are intended to represent ordinary people's needs and wishes."
"According to the Cambridge dictionary."
If that is so, we should get rid of the Cambridge dictionary. Being populist is more than simply being popular. It means to raise people's spirits and to use people to gain his own ends.
Gaetano Rapagnetta, alias Gabriele D'Annunzio, was extremely popular at his time (1920), a charming and amuzing poet and politician. But he also led a legion of mercenaries and inspired the fascist movement. He was far from being a servant to the people, but certainly a populist. He used the people.
An opposite example is coming from ancient times. Solon to his pupils, on public relation: "Advice not pleasantly but usefully!"
Complain about this comment
#70 Threnodio
---and don´t try to tell me there is no Feudalism in Britain !
--- it appears there would be no Britain without it !
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/picturegalleries/royalty/8316209/Royals-in-uniform.html
Complain about this comment
So, other than calling on the U.S. to "fix it", has the EU leaders decided on a course of action vis-a-vis Libya?
Complain about this comment
#73 - oeichler
You are quite right to tear me a apart. A little knowledge is a dangerous thing and relying on memory at may age not always wise. I apologise.
What I was thinking of was the curious mechanism by which the various coalitions have been cemented by giving the foreign affairs portfolio to junior partners - Walter Scheel, Hans-Dietrich Genscher, Klaus Kinkel and Guido Westerwelle in the case of the FDP, Willy Brandt, Helmut Schmidt, Frank-Walter Steinmeier for the SPD and Joschka Fischer for the Greens.
However, I do recall that these various alliances have from time to time stood in the way of Germany supporting reform of the CAP. I cannot find letter and verse but perhaps you could enlighten us with your knowledge.
#77 - quietoaktree
"---and don´t try to tell me there is no Feudalism in Britain"
I would not try to tell you anything. There is no answer to blind prejudice. I am happy to apologise to oeichler. To you I owe nothing. Perhaps, rather that trading insults, we would be better off ignoring one another.
Complain about this comment
#77 - quietoaktree
You are even seeking to mislead willfully. The photo you link to of is of a professional serving officer in the armed forces. That he is also a member of the royal family simply goes to show that you are more likely to have your picture taken if you have an HRH to stick before your name.
Complain about this comment
#74
quietoaktree;
You should be ashamed of yourself.
MODS: please review your decision to allow this post to remain on the blog.
Complain about this comment
champagne_charlie wrote: "MODS: please review your decision to allow this post to remain on the blog."
------------------------------------------------
Why? Afraid of the truth?
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
#77. At 6:08pm on 09 Mar 2011, quietoaktree
It would seem the single celled organism has not changed, well said Threnodio in #80
Complain about this comment
#74. At 5:42pm on 09 Mar 2011, quietoaktree
Anti smoking day in Britain, to the detriment of some of my friends, and not me as I have never smoked, Britain is simply obeying what your beloved EU is insisting on. In the UK now I can enter a pub and leave without my clothes smelling like an ash tray, as I can in some other countries.
Just what was the point of your reference to Britain
Complain about this comment
#81 - champagne_charlie
#82 - Illogicbuster
This is getting hopelessly out of hand. Illogicbuster - you know exactly what Charlie means. He is - and I am sure he will correct me if I am wrong - critical of the way in which the Tree has deliberately sought to create a link between the British anti-smoking campaign and National Socialism. If I am correct, C-C is 100% right.
Before you posted your 'Afraid of the truth' comment, did you actually read the links QOT posted. I suggest you do. The first one directly links anti-smoking campaigns with Nazism and the other two suggest that the anti-smoking movement has gathered way too much momentum. What has the truth got to do with it? You are a stranger to the truth.
Let me tell you may position. I have been a heavy smoker for the better part of fifty years. I fully accept that I have no right to inflict my disgusting habit on others. I live a normal life. I go to the opera and to concerts knowing perfectly well that I may not smoke in those environments. I understand that, where segregation is not possible - for example on planes or in buses - I should not smoke. I would not light up in someone's car or home without being invited to do so. But this is not political. It is simply good manners.
Where it becomes political is when honest business people, recognising that there are smokers out here, make a decision to allow smoking on their premises, advertise the fact quite openly so that non-smokers can choose to go elsewhere only to find they are outside the law. This is downright stupid. It reminds me slightly of drinking and driving laws in some countries where there is a permissible level of blood alcohol content. Either drinking and driving is unacceptable and should be totally banned or it is not. Same thing with smoking. If it really is evil, ban it once and for all. The sheer blind hypocrisy inherent in taxing the living daylights out of it to the benefit of sundry treasuries then treating the source of this income like lepers is staggering.
What is most certainly unacceptable is to associate what is essentially a social and public health issue with a political agenda. I entirely agree with champagne_charlie and - before you start pontificating about the truth - I suggest you go and I find out what it is. the Tree would not recognise the truth if it stood up and kicked him in the face. So mods, please do not remove the post. Ignorance is bliss and we all need a little bliss in our otherwise rather grey lives.
Complain about this comment
54 democracy writes:
"But this is very far from reality. You can check the facts. The people who were invited to the seminars and counsels that begat the EU were titled aristocrats. They were Dukes, Barons, Princes and Lords. Crucially, this is what they call themselves, and what THEY DEMAND OTHERS CALL THEM. And it was this criteria which allowed one to take part in the creation of the EU."
--------------------------------
on being challenged he goes on at 64:
"Rather than, listen to me repeat my opinions, I feel you would be better served to check the facts for yourself.
It is not easy to find out who was invited to the seminars that founded the EU. I accept that. It is not easy to establish who founded the political parties who dominate the administration of most european state. I concede the point that this research is not easy.
But the information is out there, if you look. If you know how to look.
So, look. I think you will amazed. I certainly was."
Go on democracy, if the research is not easy to find don't let us spend hours trying to get the information for ourselves. Or is it so difficult because these conspiracy websites are so hard to locate? And while you are at it would you like to explain to us pro EU citizens why people in EU countries are among the richest, most productive and healthiest people in the world? And maybe you could also enlighten us to how much better we all had it in the good old days before the EU? All those aristocrats must have go something right?
Complain about this comment
#87 - margaret howard
"Go on democracy, if the research is not easy to find don't let us spend hours trying to get the information for ourselves"
Pot - kettle? Kettle - pot?
Complain about this comment
#86
threnodio;
"and I am sure he will correct me if I am wrong - critical of the way in which the Tree has deliberately sought to create a link between the British anti-smoking campaign and National Socialism. If I am correct, C-C is 100% right."
Thankyou, that is exactly what I meant.
Complain about this comment
#88. At 8:32pm on 09 Mar 2011, threnodio_II
Come on now Threnodio, MH is finally admitting that she finds it hard to find anything, let alone the truth, we've long known that the first page of a google or yahoo search is as far as she can manage, and that she has yet to understand search rankings.
Complain about this comment
Actually, this exchange raises an interesting question. There is an element of inverted snobbery about this - a hint that being titled or aristocratic or born into a privileged or advantaged situation somehow makes one less adequate to progress society. Does it not occur to you that, in those days when status was important, the liberal instincts of some such were instrumental in propelling us to where we are now?
Complain about this comment
#80 Threnodio
--- Keep on clicking through the family album of #77
---there is more than meets the eye !
Complain about this comment
#92
quietoaktree;
And? So? Whats your point?
Complain about this comment
#85 Buzet 23
“Just what was the point of your reference to Britain“
--you gave one possible answer yourself ---- backwardness ?
#86 Threnodio
"- critical of the way in which the Tree has deliberately sought to create a link between the British anti-smoking campaign and National Socialism."
If I wanted to make a link between Britain and National Socialism --do you honestly think I would stoop so low and choose ´smoking´????
If I had really wanted to do such a terrible thing --- I am sure you would agree that-
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/2074100.stm
---would have ben more appropriate ?
Complain about this comment
#92 - quietoaktree
All right. I admit it. I am fed up with work for one day so I did scroll through the Telegraph family album and guess what I found? Sophie, Countess of Wessex and Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall are excellent examples of the point you are making - bimbos in fatigues. But the rest of them? Show me one that does not have a thorough military background and combat experience.
Complain about this comment
#94 - quietoaktree
"If I wanted to make a link between Britain and National Socialism --do you honestly think I would stoop so low and choose ´smoking´????"
Yes, I do think you would sink that low.
Complain about this comment
#94
quietoaktree;
This is getting worse by the post - have you been having a shot or three of the amber nectar with your Camels?
Complain about this comment
#97 - champagne_charlie
Forget it C_C. We have enough to answer for without wasting our time on bovine excrement.
Complain about this comment
#95 Threnodio
-- I am only suggesting --that the positions they hold within ´Her Majesties´ armed forces are Feudally distributed.
--- not necessarily based on merit.
Complain about this comment
#99 - quietoaktree
Then you clearly have never served with them. It is 'Her Majesty's' armed forces, by the way. If you are reduced to insulting us, do at least have the grace to use the language correctly.
Complain about this comment
#99. At 9:28pm on 09 Mar 2011, quietoaktree
We've been through this foolishness so many times in the past that it has become boring, if anyone is subject to backward thinking it is yourself. The days of the upper class twits being automatically made officers went out with WWI, yet you still have not learnt that. You for some unknown reason are still engaged in a fantasy class war, just like certain dinosaur union bosses you seem to be a relic searching desperately for a cause.
Complain about this comment
#99
quietoaktree;
Aside from those in active service the positions "they" hold are honorary. Its the tradition to maintain links between the monarchy and the various branches of the military. Seriously, what is so hard to understand about that?
You will find pictures of royalty in uniform in Belgium, Norway, Sweden, Holland, Denmark,Luxembourg and Spain and it also only for tradition. Cant you now go bother them , tell them they are backward and demand their expulsion from the EU? Or go back to your compatriots on the US blog, seeing as you've now come out the closet.
Complain about this comment
Buzet 23
"-- You for some unknown reason are still engaged in a fantasy class war, just like certain dinosaur union bosses you seem to be a relic searching desperately for a cause."
---you mean like this ?
http://jasonweixelbaum.wordpress.com/2010/12/25/historiography-of-corporatenazi-collaboration-review-essay/
Complain about this comment
#102 - champagne_charlie
". . . seeing as you've now come out the closet".
Must have missed that. Would explain the problems with English. White, black, yellow, green - one leg, two legs - gay, straight? Just curious.
Complain about this comment
#104
threnodio;
The problems with the British will come from some silly marcusaurelius2 incident he had in the UK, you know some minor thing which scarred him for life...dumped by a British girl or thrown out of a restaurant for refusing to stop smoking, and a vendetta has ensued ever since.
The "coming out of the closet" is the plethora of recent references on the US blogs to "us" and "our" when referring to Americans and America. Fits in with his claim that if he ever admitted his nationality he would be branded a traitor, and only Americans would possibly think that people who are ashamed to be Americans are traitors.
This also explains his preferred place of residence:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_smoking_bans
"With some of Europe's highest smoking rates, Germany's patchwork of smoking bans continues to be contested.
In February 2009, Der Spiegel reported that the smoking bans in bars are being very weakly controlled by the authorities, and in many places the ban is not observed at all."
Complain about this comment
#103 - quietoaktree
You really are beyond hope.
You think it is useful to drag up old business associations from the 30s and 40s? You think it is a good plan to go after old war criminals who can barely stand up while the Union Carbide still fail to acknowledge Bhopar? You think it is acceptable that Ratko Mladic evades the courts while you are chasing around looking for long dead Nazis? What about a bit of justice for the living?
But then you have already figured that out have you not? If they have a title, a family history, a uniform, some kind of status then they are guilty. Guilty of what, heaven only knows. Sill at least they are probably not Jewish, Roma or gay so I guess that makes them fair game?
Does the word tolerance mean nothing to you?
Complain about this comment
#102 CC
--- I just love nationalists --they are so innocent, cute and naive !
Complain about this comment
#107
quietoaktree;
"-- I just love nationalists --they are so innocent, cute and naive !"
Waving the white flag already? You tell me what part of #102 is incorrect and we'll go from there.
Complain about this comment
#105 - champagne_charlie
How disappointing. I thought you had him pinned down.
Still the one thing about the Tree is that he serves to remind me that I miss MAII - how sad is that?
I fear for Marcus - at least he was amusing.
Complain about this comment
#108 - champagne_charlie
#107 - quietoaktree
"--- I just love nationalists --they are so innocent, cute and naive"
Well maybe we have pinned him/her down after all. I will just go and pluck my eyebrows and tidy up my nails while he/she decides whether he/she has a a nation.
Innocent, cute, naive and stateless?
Complain about this comment
CC
--From the list of countries you gave --- where are their nationalists (NIK excluded) ????
The only contributors who cry bitterly when their countries are not praised --are the Brits and the Americans-- very strange ?
--its definitely worth a study !
-- Marcus only knocked Europe in general --his anniversary is 8th November.
Complain about this comment
Threnodio
--stateless--
--- Maybe I´m Palestinian or Kurdish ?
--- that would also explain some views ?
Complain about this comment
95 threnodio writes:
"But the rest of them? Show me one that does not have a thorough military background and combat experience."
How about Edward the Quitter - the prince who leaves the marines after 4 months? Can't remember Ann being in any wars or Charles, come to think of it. No doubt we'll soon see Mike Tindall and Zara sporting a few medals after their wedding and later on the 'demure and sophistcated Chelsey'. No longer 'Rule Brittania' but 'Pure Ruritania'!
Oh,and 88 threnodio in reply to your 'Pot - kettle? Kettle - pot?'
"But the information is out there, if you look. If you know how to look.
So, look. I think you will amazed. I certainly was."
Complain about this comment
#113 - margaret howard
It is quite common for people to try for the marines and decide it is not for them. If Edward was a quitter, then so are many other people every year. Better by far to have the right people in the right job.
"Can't remember Ann being in any wars or Charles, come to think of it". Of course you can't. There was a campaign of Celts without uniforms trying to kill the English for simply existing. What did you expect - an advert in the Illustrated London News?
For someone who hates the English so richly, I am astonished you have the nerve to live amongst them and even more astonished that they welcome you.
On the never ending topic of references, stop being so damned superior and vague and name your sources or expect to be treated with the contempt you deserve.
Complain about this comment
lets be civilized lol but isnt the no-fly zone something that America has to acheive with European consent?
But there is no such thing as European consent until after the fact...because Europe never consents to any action until the choice is join or not.
Answering someones above question...Europe dithers and dithers until it is led...leading requires individual nations which exist and hence
render the EU powerless---seeming to the biggies, Germany and France :)
Complain about this comment
BTW, welcome back DemoThreat, don't let people drive you off..we've somehow "lost" Marcus..sadly.
:)
Complain about this comment
NO eulogy, no goodbye, no nothing from Marcus..maybe others like Nik, Franco and WebAlice will be here more often, now that you are back :))
Think of that.
Complain about this comment
114. At 00:11am on 10 Mar 2011, threnodio_II wrote:
#113 - margaret howard
It is quite common for people to try for the marines and decide it is not for them. If Edward was a quitter, then so are many other people every year. Better by far to have the right people in the right job.
"Can't remember Ann being in any wars or Charles, come to think of it". Of course you can't. There was a campaign of Celts without uniforms trying to kill the English for simply existing. What did you expect - an advert in the Illustrated London News?
For someone who hates the English so richly, I am astonished you have the nerve to live amongst them and even more astonished that they welcome you.
On the never ending topic of references, stop being so damned superior and vague and name your sources or expect to be treated with the contempt you deserve."
And so say almost ALL of us!
Your spot-on with the colossal extent of the lady's 'hates the English'.
To illustrate:
Well over a year ago the fragrant Margaret berated as my "...bullying defenceless people" & ridiculed my previously being a member of the UK Paratroopers with my "typical English aggressivesness.." tagged on for good measure.
Now, apparently 'Andrew the quitter' because he found he wasn't suited to being a member of the Marines & chose not to be 'aggressive' or 'bully' others!
The woman's entire viewpoint is so spectacularly coloured by her prejudice against 'English' people it is a wonder she hasn't been rumbled by those in the community where she lives & ostracised.
Examples:
She claims to be 'afraid to go out at night' because of the English yobs' in her community.
She claims only English men & their wives are drunk & misbehave on holidays in Spain etc.
She claims Remembrance Day is only observed in England as Scots, Welsh, Irish 'don't care' about the Armed Forces (her infamous... Remember this, remmember that... never a chance to forget..' diatribe).
She insists only the English took part in such grim episodes as Slave Trade', 'Colonisation' etc.
Her really excruciatingly funny attempt to use the expression 'Perfidious Albion' as though it only referred to England.
The Ms Jean Brodie Grammar School educated Scots girl who condemned the Ancient Britons/English for their Druid worship at Stonehenge and laugh-out-loud gave the Greeks worship at Delphi as an example of superiority!
She even has backed those misguided few who've attempted to blame G.B. (naturally she wrote 'England') for starting World War 1 & 2!
However, I will admit IMO there is something touchingly idiosyncratic about a Scottish lady, married to an Englishman, resident in East Anglia for 40 odd years who admits to trawling google, wiki & the media in general on a regular basis and ends up finding only items prejudicial to England & the English!
Britain has a long & distinguished History of accomodating such absurdly out-of-kilter, fringe elements and were she to disappear our Blog would be diminished (as IMO in agreement with Stevenson about loss of MAII).
Complain about this comment
#111
quietoaktree;
Perhaps you would like to see four of the top six largest per capita contributors to the EU budget kicked out of Europe due to them having constitutional monarchies?
I found some nice pictures of royals in uniform. Dont say I dont do anything for you:
http://www.rnw.nl/english/article/royal-family-damaged-public-debate
http://www.zimbio.com/photos/Queen+Margarethe+II/Prince+Henrik/Danish+Royals+Celebrate+New+Years/SnmLMekPCtl
http://www.hellomagazine.com/profiles/king-carl-xvi-gustaf-of-sweden/
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1583174/King-Juan-Carlos-of-Spain-gives-heir-a-correspondence-course-in-ruling.html
http://www.zimbio.com/pictures/5VeIX1CyHq4/65th+Anniversary+End+WWII+King+Albert+Belgium/4ufZMijdCRL/King+Albert+II
http://cwojournal.wordpress.com/2010/11/09/norways-king-harald-opens-new-joint-hq-in-arctic-circle/
Its a pity that there are so few people on these blogs from the countries I have represented above. Perhaps they will be along any moment to hear what you have to say about their backward, feudal societies.
Complain about this comment
Re $#119
charlie, you effort is highly appreciated.
However, how about a photo of Segolene Royal in uniform?
[somehow I don't think you'd find a pic of Marine LePen in one]
Complain about this comment
Hi
This debate seems to have wandered a long way since its inception.
Gavin's article was about the use of the word populist as a term of insult within Brussels. To many people this implies a hostility to democracy because whether populist policies appeal to the hearts or minds of the electorate they achieve their populist status by being perceived as having popular support. Attempts to defend President Barroso on etymological grounds have thus far been unconvincing as they have not addressed the core of the problem which is that populist implies popularity and in a democracy the popular view is important.
I did attempt to suggest reform of the EU to make it more accountable to the electorate. The only direct response to this was dismissive on the grounds that, and I appologise to cool-bruch-work if I have misread him, those of a Eurosceptic bent believe the EU institutions to be so indifferent to the views of the electorate that the idea of reform lacks credibility.
I would like to know if many other people out there share this deeply sceptical view of the EU's ability to reform itself into a more democratically accountable organistaion. I would also like to hear from the more vehement Euro-sceptics what sort of shape the reform of the EU would have to take to have credibility in their eyes.
Complain about this comment
Re #118
CBW: "Greeks worship at Delphi as an example of superiority!"
Is this that worship place?
http://v12.nonxt8.c.bigcache.googleapis.com/static.panoramio.com/photos/original/46966949.jpg?redirect_counter=1
Complain about this comment
121. At 09:07am on 10 Mar 2011, Ulkomaalainen wrote:
"..I did attempt to suggest reform of the EU to make it more accountable to the electorate. The only direct response to this was dismissive on the grounds that, and I appologise to cool-bruch-work if I have misread him, those of a Eurosceptic bent believe the EU institutions to be so indifferent to the views of the electorate that the idea of reform lacks credibility."
No misreading by You.
Frankly, I cannot imagine there is a EU-sceptic who would not prefer to have genuine Reform from within the EU-Brussels entity.
However, equally I cannot imagine there is an EU-sceptic who would for one moment believe that such a thing were possible.
Those in authority/power at the EU have absolutely no intention/inclination to alter one iota of their 'supremacy' laden framework: This is a Politbureau of Soviet Union dimensions - - the Commission isn't answerable to any Electorate, the EP isn't answerable to its Constituents and an at best aquiescent EUropean Court of Justice strikes-down with impunity any National Statute/Law whenever it may threaten/challenge the over-bearing, one-size-fits-all, authoritarian EU.
And, neither do the majority of the State Leaderships - - afterall, the EU has so many useful purposes from their perspective - - whether large, medium or small the National ruler & their Ministers get to stand on the 'big' Conference stage every 6 months, glad-handing each other whilst gleefully apportioning the 'big-Government/big-Business' deals, and in-between they can share out the 'jobsworth' EU posts to the good, indifferent & bad politicians of their nations whilst always holding in reserve the opportunity to blame anything that goes awry on Brussels (& vice versa)!
It's magic!
And what is more: Just like most Britons the majority of Continental EUropeans have been willing to put up with this wretchedly Un-Demcoratic state of affairs!
However, I do feel there is change in the offing - - whether EU-Brussels will grasp how big a threat is at hand or whether it will take Civil unrest to force change upon it only time will tell.
I.e. "Nousta Kapinaan!" (Come the Uprising!)
Bearing that prediction in mind: Semi-Cheers!
Complain about this comment
122. At 09:08am on 10 Mar 2011, powermeerkat wrote:
Re #118
CBW: "Greeks worship at Delphi as an example of superiority!"
Is this that worship place?"
BRILLIANT, simply BRILLIANT!
Such wit is worthy of Damon Runyon.
Complain about this comment
#121. At 09:07am on 10 Mar 2011, Ulkomaalainen,
When a modus operandi is so deeply embedded in the culture any reform quickly becomes another excuse to raise salaries, charge expenses etc. A civil service style culture is very much like that as can be seen in the UK with the heath service. Although it's a long time ago I once spent 18 months working in a brand new computer centre in the NHS, all the people were from outside the NHS, like myself, yet within months the establishment culture had arrived. For a systems analyst to talk to a programmer you had to talk to several layers of your management who then spoke to several layers of the programmers management, before you eventually spoke to the programmer. If you understand the UK you will know that little has changed in the NHS since my day, reforms are superficial with the (mis)management culture protecting itself as always, rather to cut a few nurses than incompetent managers.
In the case of the EU institutions they are no different, it is a culture of elitism based on no justification, they are not better qualified or more intelligent, many got their posts by patronage or buggin's turn. To expect this type of culture to accept or support a meaningful reform is quite frankly naive, they won't and there are no precedents to suggest they ever will.
My one fear is that when the EU eventually implodes to a greater or lesser degree and a new series of cooperative agreements take its place, this establishment will try to impose itself on the new concept claiming to be vital to the success of the new vision.
You asked "I would also like to hear from the more vehement Euro-sceptics what sort of shape the reform of the EU would have to take to have credibility in their eyes.", I hope I have answered why I consider it will take more than a superficial reform, but a new culture before an EU would become acceptable.
Complain about this comment
119. At 08:16am on 10 Mar 2011, champagne_charlie wrote:
#111
quietoaktree;
Perhaps you would like to see four of the top six largest per capita contributors to the EU budget kicked out of Europe due to them having constitutional monarchies?
I found some nice pictures of royals in uniform. Dont say I dont do anything for you:..2
Oh come on C_C!
You'll break the poor, sad fellow's will-to-be-a sad-contributing-sap if You go on pricking him this way.
TeeHeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!
Complain about this comment
#103. At 10:18pm on 09 Mar 2011, quietoaktree
Your reference was to a blog that titles itself as "A blog about history, politics, ideology, finance, and jargon filled nonsense", the last bit being totally relevant to your views and wish to continue your backward thinking about events that are best moved on from. You may continue to hold your fantasy about class war, but that is backward, most here prefer to concentrate on today and what affects us now and in the future, not pictures of Royals in uniform, pathetic.
Complain about this comment
121 Ulkomaalainen,
It appears the dialog between the pro EU contributors and the skeptics has become a rout as even the EU defenders seem to see the problem raised by CBW, DT, CC among others here on this blog. I must agree with CBW that the denizens of Luxembourg Square will not easily give up their privileged position, but if public opinion in Germany and France continue to swing against the current structure, in time change will come, one way or another.
Complain about this comment
#128. At 10:25am on 10 Mar 2011, phillipwest
Not just on the blog, the crisis has so focused attention on the faults of the EU that people in my area of Southern Belgium who formerly lived, breathed and dreamt the EU are now sceptical and even questioning both its existence and the change to the Euro.
Complain about this comment
Hi
I went and looked up Barroso
http://ec.europa.eu/commission_2010-2014/president/about/political/index_en.htm
On page 37 he sets out his vision of how Europe should work, unsurprisingly, his position at the very centre of power. There isn't much space in his vision for the European Parliament. I find this odd as I see nothing in his job description that couldn't be done by an elected MEP and it is the MEPs who have the closest connection to the electorate from whom the EU derives its mandate.
I wonder if an MEP would be as hostile to populism as Barroso? I wonder if the MEPs enjoy being court eunuchs to the commision. However I digress.
With Barroso in a position of such influence in the EU I have to concede that the chances of the EU significantly addressing the perceived lack of accountability to the electorate lie somewhere between slim and none existent.
Complain about this comment
130. At 11:34am on 10 Mar 2011, Ulkomaalainen wrote:
Hi
I went and looked up Barroso.."
Did You know the highly esteemed (by the EU fraternity) President of the Commission Msr Barroso was a 'Maoist' during a previous existence before he saw the 'light' of Brussels' unaccountable Funds!?
They say 'leopards don't change their spots' - - well, for a former Maoist to be resolutely defending the current composition of a dogma-driven, centralised, intellectually austere EUropean Union is hardly a surprise - - judging from his 'political' roots this is a fellow whose concern for Humanity is so far-reaching there is no limitation to his ability to believe he will know better than the ordinary Citizen what is in their best interests.
A very, very, very dangerous man.
Complain about this comment
#130. At 11:34am on 10 Mar 2011, Ulkomaalainen
Quite so, what you also have to consider is that in general most of these politicians left their home countries because they were past their sell-by dates, and cannot therefore expect to slither back into a comfortable political position in their own countries. They will therefore do all they can to keep their nose in the public trough until they are pushed forcibly.
Complain about this comment
#130 - Ulkomaalainen
Well it is not really surprising is it? With Portugal and Belgium teetering on the edge of bankruptcy, the EU must be a much cozier place for the likes of Barroso and Rompuy. The executive of the EU is dangerously out of control and needs to be held accountable. The time has come to dump these bureaucrats and replace them - in so far as is necessary - with elected officials.
Complain about this comment
#127 Buzet
"The alternative to "populism" is "elitism'', where a small group of high officials and professional politicians believe they know better than the people."
--as usual, Mr. Hewitt PARTIALLY defines " elitism" -- and the Brits follow with their " populism" ?
Complain about this comment
133. At 12:15pm on 10 Mar 2011, threnodio_II wrote:
#130 - Ulkomaalainen
Well it is not really surprising is it? With Portugal and Belgium teetering on the edge of bankruptcy, the EU must be a much cozier place for the likes of Barroso and Rompuy. The executive of the EU is dangerously out of control and needs to be held accountable. The time has come to dump these bureaucrats and replace them - in so far as is necessary - with elected officials.
Hear hear.
Complain about this comment
#134. At 12:34pm on 10 Mar 2011, quietoaktree wrote:
#127 Buzet
"The alternative to "populism" is "elitism'', where a small group of high officials and professional politicians believe they know better than the people."
--as usual, Mr. Hewitt PARTIALLY defines " elitism" -- and the Brits follow with their " populism" ?
Well well, QOT, as always you are obsessed with Britain but forget that populism exists in many other EU countries and has been demonstrated in France loads of times. What you have so far failed to understand in this thread is that the French definition of populism in LaRousse is no different from the British definition in the Oxford dictionary, therefore the populism being shown in these and probably other EU countries has the same definition and meaning.
Just a thought :-
An expert is someone who has stopped thinking, he/she knows.
An elistist is someone who has stopped thinking, he/she knows.
QOT is someone who has never started thinking, he/she knows.
Aren't these definitions similar?
Complain about this comment
#121 Ulkomaalainen:
"I would also like to hear from the more vehement Euro-sceptics what sort of shape the reform of the EU would have to take to have credibility in their eyes".
================================
I don't regard myself as a vehement Euro-sceptic, but try this anyway:
To have any credibility in my eyes it would have to have my agreement to be in it, or at the very least, for the country at large to have voted in a free, fair, and properly informed referendum to be in it. I am willing to accept the majority wish, but not simply the wish of the tiny political class.
If that basic threshold were met, it would then have to accept the will of the people in any future referendum, and not force second, third and fourth votes until the result wanted by Brussels is achieved. Any future extension, changes or strengthening of powers ceded to Brussels would have to be agreed in such referenda by the people. The current EU has evolved from the "Common Market" (EEC) by stealth, and that is simply not acceptable.
In short, the EU would have to embrace democracy, and abandon its contempt for the people it supposed to serve.
Not much chance of that though is there?
Complain about this comment
Post 02 'BluesBerry' is not wrong - as population numbers explode and those same people feel impelled to buy more stuff = rubbish - the same vicious cycle will perpetuate itself globally.
Just stop buying plastic rubbish for yourself AND your children - two big steps.
You can't drink or eat plastic 'possessions' that go to landfill and poison your ground water supply that you and your children rely on.
Perhaps when you drink a famous cola product - the chances are it is produced in a country suffering from water shortages that then require foreign aid and your charity contributions? Just one small example of the cycle of waste and want that we are, as an apparently, 'advanced' global species, are tragically 'detached' from?
Complain about this comment
138. At 4:55pm on 10 Mar 2011, corum-populo-2010 wrote:
"..Just stop buying plastic rubbish for yourself AND your children - two big steps.
You can't drink or eat plastic 'possessions' that go to landfill and poison your ground water supply that you and your children rely on..."
Ah yes, the old don't fall for consumerism angle.
So, when millions upon millions of us ordinary souls stop buying consumer items and thousands upon thousands of factories, mills, mines close-down for lack of sales thus causing millions upon millions of redundancies causing even less demand for consumer products & thus millions upon millions more lose their jobs whilst their factories, mills, mines close...
Have You ever really thought about such things?
No, I'm not saying we (the consumer societies which now include China, India, Russia, S.America & fair chunks of Africa as well as the infamous 'west') couldn't do with less 'plastic' in our lives (consumer credit cards for a start), but this idea of solving the world's problems by not manufacturing/selling/buying the items You call "..rubbish.." just ISN'T any sort of reasonable answer in a World based on the quick-fix Consumerism.
Come on: If we all stop taking our grandchildren to MacD, buying Cola, Nike trainers, PlayStations etc. how is that going to solve anything without creating huge alternative economic problems at the same time?
The "..cycle of waste.." You so condemn is what accounts for Continental EUrope, North America, China, Japan & India's continued prosperity.
What exactly do You have in mind to replace those Economies & prevent vast suffering?
Complain about this comment
114 threnodio writes:
"It is quite common for people to try for the marines and decide it is not for them. If Edward was a quitter, then so are many other people every year. Better by far to have the right people in the right job."
Trust you to change the subject yet again. You had asked at 95 "Show me one that does not have a thorough military background and combat experience."
Others supplied links to sites showing other European royals heavily be-medalled. I'm afraid I couldn't care less how much ornamentation they put on as I don't have to pay for them. I do pay though for the House of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha. I hear that the forthcoming wedding is going to cost the country in the region of £20m! People keep saying that that represents less than 50p per citizen. If every person in this country gave ,say, 50p to raise £30 million for a day out for thousands of deprived children, I would be the first to contribute but to have to pay for the wedding of the son of one of the richest families in the world sticks in the craw. I hope that when Harry marries the cultured Chelsey they will get someone like 'Hello' magazine to pay for it.
You go on to say:
"For someone who hates the English so richly, I am astonished you have the nerve to live amongst them and even more astonished that they welcome you."
What astonished me even more is the fact that the most viciferously nationalistic/royalist contributors to this blog have all decided to desert their beloved country and make their homes elsewhere - Belgium, Finland, Hungary, Thailand etc.Your adopted countries must know that your heart isn't really with them yet they no doubt welcome you too. It's a strange world!
As QOT said earlier:
"The only contributors who cry bitterly when their countries are not praised --are the Brits and the Americans-- very strange ?"
I don't bang on about Scotland and how superior my own country is. Neither does he, so why do you all?
Complain about this comment
140. At 7:09pm on 10 Mar 2011, margaret howard wrote:
"..What astonished me even more is the fact that the most viciferously nationalistic/royalist contributors to this blog have all decided to desert their beloved country and make their homes elsewhere - Belgium, Finland, Hungary, Thailand etc..."
For pity's sake Margaret, GIVE IT A REST!
How You can constantly denigrate fellow Britons/English for the place they live in is prejudicial ignorance beyond the pale!
Since when has a person's residence been the qualification for the right to have an opinion?
It certainly hasn't stopped You: And there can certainly be nothing more "..strange.." in the World than Your barrage of abuse of England/English whilst living in their midst for so long!
Said before & say again: You have no SHAME!
Complain about this comment
#140. At 7:09pm on 10 Mar 2011, margaret howard
"The only contributors who cry bitterly when their countries are not praised --are the Brits and the Americans-- very strange ?"
I don't bang on about Scotland and how superior my own country is. Neither does he, so why do you all?
We don't need to MH because we know from precedent and experience how incapable your Scotland is, you as you've said are living in England and your countryman McClown has screwed you, not literally of course, but financially, yet you have learnt nothing. Your husband must truly be a very tolerant guy and I feel sorry for him.
Now as for medallions, bangles, fancy ribbons etc have you yet to notice that it is third world dictators, especially from Africa who so love that, maybe you are looking forward to your Scottish relatives getting the same, after all, third world, leaving the UK, hoping to enter the imploding EU, may well consign you to that.
Complain about this comment
The EU-rocrats have milked the "if it werent for the elites the EU wouldnt be what it is" argument dry, it no longer carries any serious weight.
That was a different time, a wholly different EU. There was a point long ago when the ECJ in particular crossed the line as to what was acceptable, particularly in regards to respect for member states individual immigration laws and welfare systems.
You'd have hoped given events across Europe during the crisis that the EU would move gradually away from the elitism of old, but there's little sign it realises it should do and needs to.
That said, I do have faith in the current batch of heads of states though (ie. Merkel, Sarkozy, Cameron, Tusk etc) who all seem to share a sensible view on the EU (ie. its a good thing, but it has its role and should be limited to that) - its clear in at least the last 4 years or so that they have held the tighter leash on the EU institutions (as they should have done long ago).
Complain about this comment
142 buzet writes:
".......your Scottish relatives getting the same, after all, third world, leaving the UK, hoping to enter the imploding EU, may well consign you to that."
No, they'll make do with a sporran and kilt. Regarding the 'imploding EU', hope we won't end up in Belgium, that really would be a punishment too far!
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS