Posted on 06/02/2005 11:30:16 PM PDT by quidnunc
If Schadenfreude is taking pleasure in the misfortune of others, then I've got a case of Eurofreude — or Francofreude, or maybe something else. All I know is this: The Europeans who annoy me are moping like they found a fingernail in their brie, and I'm feeling mighty freude. Or schaden. Or whatever.
The decision by French voters to reject the proposed European Union Constitution by 55 percent to 45 percent was a knockout blow all by itself. But when the Dutch voted down the constitution by nearly a 2-1 margin, it was as if the voice in the wind blowing off those windmills was shouting in Dutch ears, "Kick 'em again!"
Now it looks like the British won't even hold a referendum on the thing, which means in all likelihood that this version of the EU project is doomed. (Doomed, I tell you! Bwahahaha!)
That is simply great news. In recent years the entire EU project — at least in Western Europe — has taken on an anti-American flavor. Gerhard Schroeder and Jacques Chirac — the lame duck and electorally doomed leaders of Germany and France, respectively — have kept their political engines running on the fumes of anti-Americanism in recent years. The EU project has been sold as a means of counterbalancing the American "hyperpower," as the French call it. If a project with that kind of billing stumbles — and stumbles badly — and if anti-American nags like Schroeder and Chirac take it in the pants in the process, there can be no more appropriate response from the intelligent American than to dance a jig, do a shot, and wave the giant foam "We're #1" finger in the air.
-snip-
(Excerpt) Read more at townhall.com ...
My thoughts too. BWAHAHAHAHA !!!!
My British friend said it best recently: "The EU want to improve our life by taxing us more and making more laws and regulations."
This is what completely flaberghasts me about conservatives these days. They rightfully disdain the idea of the E.U. mindset, then glibly express the opinion the very thing they detest 'can be fixed'. NO IT CAN'T!
What interest do we have in supporting the inception of a world body that is expressly designed to neutralize American influence in the world? In a word, NONE!
The idea of the European Union is a terrible one. Even if it weren't so anti-American (and I could care less if the idiots on the continent want to give up their self-determination or sovereignty), but the implementation of a successful E.U. will cause outcry for an American Union to thwart it's goals. That not only will affect our self-determination and sovereignty, but will most certainly be the death knell to it.
Jonah, I like you bud, but pull you head out, smell the fresh air of freedom, self-determination and sovereignty, and curse the day you every implied the E.U. could be fixed with our help. Balderdash!
i think the europeans should unite and lose all their seats at the u.n. ... at the same time the u.s. states should head towards more independence (states rights) and gain 50 seats at the u.n.
that way we could have fun playing for a few years before abolishing the whole thing.
Brussels is burning
Jonah Goldberg
If Schadenfreude is taking pleasure in the misfortune of others, then I've got a case of Eurofreude - or Francofreude, or maybe something else. All I know is this: The Europeans who annoy me are moping like they found a fingernail in their brie, and I'm feeling mighty freude. Or schaden. Or whatever.
The decision by French voters to reject the proposed European Union Constitution by 55 percent to 45 percent was a knockout blow all by itself. But when the Dutch voted down the constitution by nearly a 2-1 margin, it was as if the voice in the wind blowing off those windmills was shouting in Dutch ears, "Kick 'em again!"
Now it looks like the British won't even hold a referendum on the thing, which means in all likelihood that this version of the EU project is doomed. (Doomed, I tell you! Bwahahaha!)
That is simply great news. In recent years the entire EU project - at least in Western Europe - has taken on an anti-American flavor. Gerhard Schroeder and Jacques Chirac - the lame duck and electorally doomed leaders of Germany and France, respectively - have kept their political engines running on the fumes of anti-Americanism in recent years. The EU project has been sold as a means of counterbalancing the American "hyperpower," as the French call it. If a project with that kind of billing stumbles - and stumbles badly - and if anti-American nags like Schroeder and Chirac take it in the pants in the process, there can be no more appropriate response from the intelligent American than to dance a jig, do a shot, and wave the giant foam "We're #1" finger in the air.
But American political leaders should do that behind closed doors. Public gloating wouldn't be in our interests.
Indeed, once we get that out of our system, there's a great deal we should be cautious about. The EU Constitution didn't fail because of widespread pro-American sentiment. It failed because French and Dutch voters saw their national - and personal - interests at odds with the constitution. The last thing we should do is distract European voters' attention away from the economy, immigration and the like by making them angry at us. Gloating would only invite precisely the sort of anti-American pique Chirac and Schroeder have exploited since before the Iraq war.
One of the fascinating factors in the French referendum was that anti-Americanism of one kind or another motivated both yes and no voters. The yes voters were interested in, among other things, creating the sort of European superstate the French have envisioned for decades. The no voters were concerned that the EU Constitution would usher in American-style "ultraliberalism" (one thing the Europeans do have going for them is they still use the word "liberal" correctly).
The French have absurdly lavish social welfare policies, particularly for the middle class and for workers. Opening France to more economic competition threatens their cushy perks. (I knew a French businessman who wanted to fire a lousy truck driver who kept missing work. He had to make an appointment with government bureaucrats six weeks in advance in order to get permission to fire his own employee.)
This points to one of the great ironies of globalization: It imposes a regression to the global mean. Various commentators have marveled at the fact that Britain and France think the EU Constitution means opposite things. The Brits don't like it because they fear it will bring Euro-socialism, while the French fear it will move France in the laissez-faire direction. Many have attributed this to voter confusion over what the constitution actually says. Why else would the Brits think it's a socialist tract while the French are convinced it's a plan for economic liberalization?
While it's true that the proposed constitution reads like a Xerox machine repair manual, the voters aren't that confused. France's bourgeois welfare state would have to be unraveled under the new regime, while comparatively free-market Britain would find its economy pulled toward greater statism.
Add the fact that the document itself is impenetrable and you can hardly blame voters for erring on the side of caution. You don't roll the dice when you might potentially be voting away your sovereignty and lifestyle. For the record, though, the constitution is no free-market tract - if Adam Smith were alive, he'd spontaneously burst into flames if he read it.
Of course, there were other reasons the constitution failed so spectacularly, including: 1) The French political system is scandalously undemocratic, and the French people felt they hadn't been consulted. 2) This may have been the last chance voters had to express their fears of Turkey joining the EU. 3) Chirac and Schroeder are unpopular fossils. 4) Ours is a just and decent God.
In any case, America and Europe have a wonderful opportunity to rework this project along lines that are in Europe's interests and ours. Let's just hope that French and German egos can handle Uncle Sam coming to the rescue - again.
There would probably be a big market for red,white & blue striped foam hands with #1 on it.
bump.
My British friend said it best recently: "The EU want to improve our life by taxing us more and making more laws and regulations."
This goes double for the UN.
bump
Sure it can. All they need to do is write a REAL Constitution, instead of a recipe for a socialist bureaucratic nomenklatura dictatorship--which is what the current EU "Constitution" really is.
When someone puts a 450 page contract and a pen in front of you, especially when it has not been made clear to you what you have to gain by signing, unless you absolutely trust the motives of the people who wrote this contract not to have any gotchas embedded in all that prose, don't sign.
How Dare you! Jacque is my friend and I know he wouldn't vote against me like you cretins. Socialism is the way to go - just look at the Democratic party!
/sarcasm off
That is like saying World War II could have been prevented... All it would have taken is for us to tell Hitler to behave like Churchill.
Fat Chance!!!
And in this case it is especially true, as it was and is obvious that the legalistic lingo is designed to let Brussels and the EU bureaucracy do whatever they damned well please.
Oh, I agree. I just find it amazing that NO country (at least that I am aware of) has, on obtaining freedom and setting off to establish a democratic form of government, has used the US Constitution and its history as a base model. This despite the fact that it has the best track record of any "democratic" form of government for a large and complex nation, and would be ideal for a large nation composed of "sovereign states" (or at least the US Constitution as it was "pre-Lincoln").
They have ALL galloped off to duplicate the "British Parliamentary" model, with a Constitution sort of "tacked on"---which model was what caused the American Revolution in the first place.
They should never have separated John and Me. We are socialists joined at the hip and I am so depressed that Americans turned against this anti-war hero.
/Sarcasm OFF
I think your point is valid. I'm just not sure it would survive in the real (E.U.) world.
I don't care what the E.U. constitution looks like upon approval. Once the E.U. is a solid reality, that constitution can and will be morphed beyond recognition. Sovereignty will be gone, the model will be set for the Americas.
I'm sure you realize the predominant socialist mindset of Europe. I don't think a constitution like ours would survive long there. For that matter, you could make the same case here. Ours is getting pretty tattered what with the Supreme Court and our political leaders whacking away at it.
I still consider the E.U. to be a very problematic prospect. I honestly do not think it can be fixed to where it would be a positive entity in relation to the goals of the United States.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.