Is politics dead? Or are we seen it been redefined.

[wiseoldred]

Following on from the rejection by both France and The Netherlands of the EU constitution due to its Neo-Liberal, pro capital economic position are we seeing politics making a comeback across europe?

Given that the Labour Party position is one of support for the constitution, do members think that we may be turning our back on some of the core socialist values that define this party?

Two very heavy questions for you to think about over the bank holiday.

[krayZpaving]

It wasn't rejected in either country because it was neo-liberal and pro-capital (I don't agree that it's either, personally). The exit opinion polling in France showed that most people who voted No voted that way because of one of the following:
-problems with Chirac
-Turkey's proposed entry to the EU
-perceived further loss of sovereignty

I haven't seen a similar poll yet from Netherlands, but a vox-pop I saw on TV last night had the people interviewed (far from a scientific survey!) saying that it was to do with sovereignty and the poor economic situation in Netherlands, which they blame on the EU.


I don't believe this Constitution is a neo-liberal document. It's a document which meets in the middle ground somewhere between the centre left and the centre right - a compromise if you like. There are people out there complaining that it's too right wing, and equally there are people complaining that it's too left wing. It's neither. It's a compromise which was most acceptable to most members of the drafting group and most governments. You can't have a socialist constitution while there are centre-right governments in Europe, because they'll veto it. You can't have a neo-liberal constitution while there are centre-left governments in Europe because they'll veto it.

This Constitution actually enshrines far more socialist values than the current situation (i.e. that included in the Nice Treaty). The preamble reads almost identically to the Labour Party's constitution's preamble. The inclusion of the Charter of Fundamental Rights is probably the biggest constitutional leap forward in decades, if not centuries.

[borderlinegenius]

I don't believe this Constitution is a neo-liberal document.

It's a document which binds states to a neo-liberal economic situation, and which removes economic sovereignty from those countries.

It outlaws left-wing economic systems.

[krayZpaving]

How exactly?

[borderlinegenius]

Nationalising any industry would be illegal.

[Libero]

Nationalising any industry would be illegal.

Yes, it would be but already is under existing rules on state aids and competition, i.e. under the existing Treaties.

BLG, you are very fond of pulling up less well read or doctrinaire socialists and explaining from on high how their *gasp* social democracy is watery, weak and a bargain with the devil of capitalism.
So I hope you don't mind me pointing out that your beloved Sinn Féin have not the guts or honesty to both oppose the EU Constitution and continued membership of the EU itself. As I said, the objectionable parts of the Consititution are there in all their glory in the existing EU Treaties but you lot don't seem to have much of a problem with it.

And there is clearly no chance in the coming decades of negotiating a socialist Europe through intergovernmental conferences and referenda.

I know you don't agree with SF on everything, but spare us the pot-shots at Labour. They are grappling with the old social democratic dilemma of principle and compromise, while SF just gives us the disingenuous party trick of screaming about certain provisions in the Consitution and then forgetting they exist already in the Treaties.

[borderlinegenius]

Yes, it would be but already is under existing rules on state aids and competition, i.e. under the existing Treaties.

Yes, indeed. And I opposed them too.

BLG, you are very fond of pulling up less well read or doctrinaire socialists and explaining from on high how their *gasp* social democracy is watery, weak and a bargain with the devil of capitalism.

Please find me one example of me doing this.

I'm not a socialist, by the way.

So I hope you don't mind me pointing out that your beloved Sinn Féin have not the guts or honesty to both oppose the EU Constitution and continued membership of the EU itself. As I said, the objectionable parts of the Consititution are there in all their glory in the existing EU Treaties but you lot don't seem to have much of a problem with it.

Sinn Féin opposed the other treaties too. They are also involved in the social forum, PANA and so on, groups which want to preserve the EU but to change it radically in the direction of a social Europe.

And there is clearly no chance in the coming decades of negotiating a socialist Europe through intergovernmental conferences and referenda.

Clearly not. I don't think anyone has suggested otherwise.

I know you don't agree with SF on everything, but spare us the pot-shots at Labour. They are grappling with the old social democratic dilemma of principle and compromise, while SF just gives us the disingenuous party trick of screaming about certain provisions in the Consitution and then forgetting they exist already in the Treaties.

SF have consistently opposed such provisions, and it would be disingenuous to support them now.

'Spare us the pot-shots at Labour'? I didn't mention Labour. I can, if you want, explain how their support for the constitution confirms their status as a party of the right.

Y'know, if you like...

[LowIQ]

[quote="SF just gives us the disingenuous party trick of screaming about certain provisions in the Consitution and then forgetting they exist already in the Treaties.[/quote]
Cool! An anti-Shinner rant! Can I join in? And should I start another thread to discuss the EU Constitution?

[qtman]

Cool! An anti-Shinner rant! Can I join in? And should I start another thread to discuss the EU Constitution?

No, don't. Lets just bask for a while in Libero's perfectly formed response to BLG on SF and the EUC.

[krayZpaving]

They are also involved in the social forum, PANA and so on, groups which want to preserve the EU but to change it radically in the direction of a social Europe.

Well, you could say that Labour is equally involved in these groups (in fact, a Labour member and LE candidate chairs PANA, and several people who set up the social forum are Labour members). And you couldn't say Labour is anti-EU.