With the decisive French ‘Non’ to the EU Constitution, clearly the whole project for European super-statist integration has taken a hit unlike any in its history thus far. In many ways the most significant feature of this is that it has made the intellectual and social disconnect between whole peoples in the EU’s constituent nations impossible to paper over. In short, the nation called ‘Europe’ is seen to be a fiction and the ‘inevitable march of progress’ has been shown to be an illusion.
So what happens next? The obvious move by Tony Blair is to cancel the UK’s promised referendum as being moot now that the process has been derailed. Yet there are already frantic attempts going on by the integrationists to prevent that from happening, on the basis that it would be an admission that the process really is over.
Now this attempt to get the UK to vote anyway is really splendid news and I hope that other people who share my views that the EU is an abomination will remember Napoleon’s dictum “never interrupt the enemy when he is making a mistake” as any UK vote will almost certainly be a vote against the EU which will just widen the rift in political cultures between France and the UK.
As I have stated before, unlike David, I wish that France had voted ‘Oui’ so that Blair could not possibly wriggle out of his commitment to hold a referendum and thus allow Britain to vote ‘No’, thereby making the UK a virtual ‘pariah state’ to the French, Spanish and German political elites and as a result making them perverse allies in the effort to disengage the UK from the EU. Oh well, scratch one possible optimistic scenario but the situation is now alive with all sorts of other interesting possibilities.
But it is still hard to see the rejection of the EU Constitution by anyone as bad news. How it will play out remains to be seen but the attempt to sleepwalk Europe into an ever more dystopian regulatory super-state just got a bucket of cold water poured over it. The game is afoot and provided the Tory Party do not go and live up to their nickname name by choosing some member of the Quisling right to lead them, maybe even that collection of risk averse Grandees will realise that taking on the EU is something that can reap huge political benefits. Labour too must be looking at the spectacle of the French power elite being bitten in the arse by millions of common people who want the political system to impose economic and social stasis to a background rap of splendidly unintelligible gibberish from sundry French intellectuals and thinking “there but for the grace of God…”. At least some of them must be wondering if the downside of Euro-integration is worth the political risks.
The dismay is palpable. It is hard not to laugh. 
Well said Perry. Unfortunately I still believe that any referendum would be dangerous in the UK since one should only hold such a poll if one is at least 90% sure of the outcome, a very unwise thing to do in the UK over such an emotive issue as the EU.
The voters of theUK want a chance to put the EU Constitution where the sun don’t shine??
What is that german word? Sangfroid? It sorta means ‘politely gloating’ or something like that. I think all the pundits are reading to much into the ‘no’. The Constitution was poorly written, and would had created more problems then it resolved. Maybe the ‘no vote was just that, A no we don’t like the constitution as it is written, vote.
The Idea of a European Union is still a sound one. The Politicians just need to do more work. Maybe you guys should wait a few months and then hire the Iraqi’s to write one for you.
The rejected constitution was written by the French, so let the next one be written by the Germans. If that one doesn’t try, give the Poles a chance, or the Swedes. Or maybe a bottom up document. Have each potential member state do a one page. Then have the politicians comndense that to about 10 pages and hold a referendum on it. Just keep in mind that quitters never win. Then once you do have a Constitution, hire a Madison Ave firm to market it. European Marketing is almost as inept as Chinese Marketing. The Average Euro couldn’t sell a life vest to a drowning man.
The Idea of a European Union is still a sound one.
Reminds me of The Idea of communism is still a sound one…
How much more proof does one need to dismiss a centralised and moribund entity, based on authoritarian ideology and riddled with vested interests? And I am talking about EU, not the Soviet bloc.
Well said, Adriana.
It amazes me that people can still cling to the wreckage of the EU, apparently incapable of recognising the stark fact that it doesn’t work and never could.
Schadenfreude.
Don’t forget some coverage of the upcoming Dutch ‘no’. The things our PM is saying to get us to vote ‘yes’ are too hilarious to ignore.
I dunno, Perry.
Is a referendum mandatory before the Constitution is ratified? If so, then no referendum is a guaranteed defeat, while any referendum gives the EUnuchs a chance at victory. I’ll take the 100% guaranteed defeat for the tranzis any day.
Britain out of EU wouldn’t really have been an optimistic scenario. Taking your head out of the lion’s mouth may save you but it doesn’t make the lion vanish, nor does it rescue anyone else.
This move by the French in particular and on this one treaty in particular, raises the real possibility that EU could break apart or shatter completely. That would be a really optimistic scenario.
R C Dean. No, five countries have already signed up without a referendum. The only countries having referenda are those whose voters insisted on it. Even then, the Dutch government has had the temerity to say their referendum will not be binding.
Stehpinkeln:
” Have each potential member state do a one page. Then have the politicians comndense that to about 10 pages and hold a referendum on it. Just keep in mind that quitters never win. Then once you do have a Constitution, hire a Madison Ave firm to market it. ”
A very sensible approach. Way beyond the capacity of the Eurocrats. The 418 page document is the best they were able to produce, after 5 years of deliberations. This constitution exactly fits the EU essence, no other one is possible.
They will march on, with a constitution or without; this was a nice piece of comedy, but I doubt it will have big consequences.
Jacob – I don’t know. It may morph into something else. Sooner rather than later, Britain, Holland and Denmark will be motivated to go their own way, with perhaps some free trade and free movement of people, services and goods treaties. In other words, the way the EU was originally, dishonestly, sold to the peoples of Britain and Europe.
The electorate of one of the two major players, and the copatriots of the verbal diaorrhea sufferer who wrote the “constitution” rejected a long-planned step forward into servitude. No matter how they try to minimise it, it was major. Apart from anything – and there is plenty – else – it will encourage les autres.
To equate the EU to communism is ridiculous. The EU is not or at least should not be a political philosophy. That the EU developed into the statist, dirigiste stagnating behemoth that it is today is tragic but not inevitable. There is no reason other than the idiocy and stubbornness of its Franco-German creators why the EU can’t have a constitution that espouses the merits of small government, low taxes and free trade.
dunderheid – Why? Why would we need the bureaucratic overlay of such a document? We’re doing fine.
dunderheid,
The EU thing is not yet complete totalitarianism but it is certainly heading in that direction.
Becoming a statist stagnating behemoth is inevitable for just about any kind of democratic state.
Small government, low taxes and free trade are best achieved by removing the entire EU monster and all measures put in place to prevent free trade.
…Small government, low taxes and free trade are best achieved by removing the entire EU monster and all measures put in place to prevent free trade……
The EU is based on the false premise that free trade is a favour given to us by the elite, rather than an innate right.
Supporters often say, “but we need to harmonise the rules to create a level playing field”. A kind of equality of shackles for all.
If you reject this top down ideology, then there is no reason for the EU to exist at all.
Lets hope this is the first crack that destroys the whole thing.
The EU is not or at least should not be a political philosophy. That the EU developed into the statist, dirigiste stagnating behemoth that it is today is tragic but not inevitable. There is no reason other than the idiocy and stubbornness of its Franco-German creators why the EU can’t have a constitution that espouses the merits of small government, low taxes and free trade.
Adding more government when Europe already looks to have plenty of it certainly reeks of the political philosophy ‘statism’ to me. In fact, it seems impossible that you could espouse small government by creating a whole ‘nother layer of government on top of a bunch of existing governments. That it might promote low taxes is possible, but unlikely. After all, there will be that many more new, worthless bureaucratic mouths to feed.
“a centralised and moribund entity, based on authoritarian ideology and riddled with vested interests” – also a pretty good description of the newly elected UK Government.
and thus allow Britain to vote ‘No’, thereby making the UK a virtual ‘pariah state’…
Very dangerous and misguided, in my opinion, to assume that a UK vote will result in a ‘no’.
This goes doubly so if France, Spain et al vote ‘yes’ because it will enable our elites to press all the pain buttons about Britain being ‘isolated’ in Europe, ‘missing the boat’, ‘ being left behind’, Little Englanders, Racists, Xenophobes etc etc. That kind of scaremongering works here and our voters are far less ideological and less bloshy than the French.
Better that the project is seen to be scuppered (or at least delayed) by the French rather than us.
No Stehpinkeln ‘that German word? sangfroid?’ is what British people do when Americans who are wholly ignorant of European politics [and languages] tell us that we ought to form a European State because it would make us more like the good old U.S. of A.
You can reduce government by adding another layer, if the big government’s main role is to say “no” a lot to all the little governments. USA more or less worked on that model for awhile, although Lincoln and then FDR loused it up pretty badly.
EU obviously is nothing like that, and I doubt either it could be made into such, not without tearing it down entirely and rebuilding from scratch.
David Carr has a good point, as does Julian Taylor at the top. You never know how much the supine majority in Britain can be manipulated – especially with the childish bullying David describes above. Given that every man, woman and child, including those who have spent their entire lives on welfare, has been abroad for holidays and weekend breaks (breaks from what?), is there one person in the UK today who could be described as a xenophobe? But it doesn’t matter, because the word has taken on a life of its own. It stands in for, “Someone I hold in contempt. Someone I can feel superior to.” Few of the people who employ it have the faintest idea what it means.
David and Julian are right to be cautious. I agree; it’s best to see the whole thing scuppered by someone else and just sit back and watch.
Chris Goodman says: No Stehpinkeln ‘that German word? sangfroid? is what British people do when Americans who are wholly ignorant of European politics [and languages]
… Chris, you forgot to add, “and the history of European nations”. Apart from anything else, you would have to have a tin ear to think sang froid sounds German!! – even if, inexplicably, you had never come across the phrase before in context.
Stehpinkeln – it’s two words, by the way.
The EU or any other governing supranational body is a very bad idea for “Europe”, which is a continent, not a country, and has been populated by local indigenes since time immemorial.
And it is a proverbially British quality, at least in France. Britons don’t seem to be living up to that stereotype these days.
No, but some of us are enjoying our Schädenfreude.
Verity,
Given that every man, woman and child, including those who have spent their entire lives on welfare, has been abroad for holidays and weekend breaks
If the above is true, and I have no reason to doubt that it isn’t, you make a good case for proving that socialism, ‘Tony style’, really does work. Bed, board, transport and holidays abroad for everyone. Seems as though the aim of wealth distribution is almost complete. Gosh, the UK must be a paradise on earth! sort of USSR without the snow.
Tell me again, why do some 50% of the population want to emigrate?
Because they’re paying for holiday, housing, transport and healthcare for legions of parasites?
I’m beginning to wonder if closer political union with Europe might at least delay the onset of totalitarianism in the UK. After all, we already have the RIP act, and soon we’ll have ID cards and laws to end free speech. Perhaps a lumbering, inefficient Brussels behemoth might destroy what remains of our freedoms at a marginally slower pace than our own indigenous totalitarians, who seem to be rather too efficient in this respect.
Verity,
Good to see that you haven’t lost your delightful sense of humour!
Main Entry: sang·froid
Pronunciation: ‘sän-‘f(r)wä
Function: noun
Etymology: French sang-froid, literally, cold blood
: self-possession or imperturbability especially under strain
synonym see EQUANIMITY
Sorry, I thought I was being funny. I guess it doidn’t play well on that side of the pond, where it is two words.
I’ll stop. As with all humor, your laughter may vary.
“Where humor is concerned there are no standards – no one can say what is good or bad, although you can be sure that everyone will. ”
– John Kenneth Galbraith
US (Canadian-born) administrator & economist (1908 – )
“There’s no trick to being a humorist when you have the whole government working for you.”
– Will Rogers
US humorist & showman (1879 – 1935)
“Humor is always based on a modicum of truth. Have you ever heard a joke about a father-in-law?”
-Dick Clark
Ze French rulers in ze arsch have gekicken been, coz ze stupid snail-esseners asked ze French volk vot zey thought. Zis is not ze Cherman vay. Ve do not trust ze voters to give ze korrect antwort, not after ze Tirties, ven zey backed dat guy ve don’t menschen who made ze Reich go pear-shaped.
Nowadays ve tell ze volk vot ve will do, as ve follow ze great dream of a New European Ordnung and ze Reichstag rubber-stamps it. Eighty million Chermans can’t be wrong, but vy take ze risk? Already ze countries of ze East we fought to acquire in times past haf into our Lebensraum komm peacefully, und ve haf peace on ze Vestern Front– or ve did until Jacques und Marianne said ‘Non’, dummkopfen! Now Jaap und Greta are about to do ze same, und ve can be sure that Wayne und Samantha vill vote ‘No’ also: so unter der sway of Murdoch und Der Mail haf zey gefallen.
Zis is a provocation. Ve cannot let our Grosse Projekt be wrecked by zese ignorant peasants und leftist agitators– ze future of Europa is too important to be left to dose schweinhunden!!
Frankfurt banker – That was hysterical, and very clever! Thank you!