What about a different model?

[Michael G]

I voted No on Thursday and I am delighted with the result. But a strong entity to defend European interests against Chinese etc is clearly desirable. I could see myself voting yes to a European Union on the US model. For example if you lived in California you could have legislation for homosexuals to marry dolphins and a compulsory health-and-safety check every time you went to the jacks, or you could go to Oklahoma and not wear a seatbelt and shoot burglars. We would still have a federal Government and a strong foreign policy. Why can't we have that instead of a Union that concerns itself with micro-legislation and meddling with everyday life?

[Universal_001]

I voted No on Thursday and I am delighted with the result. But a strong entity to defend European interests against Chinese etc is clearly desirable. I could see myself voting yes to a European Union on the US model. For example if you lived in California you could have legislation for homosexuals to marry dolphins and a compulsory health-and-safety check every time you went to the jacks, or you could go to Oklahoma and not wear a seatbelt and shoot burglars. We would still have a federal Government and a strong foreign policy. Why can't we have that instead of a Union that concerns itself with micro-legislation and meddling with everyday life?

Childlike nationalism still exists.

[Michael G]

Moi? Didn't I just say I would sign up for the US model?

[junketman]

I voted No on Thursday and I am delighted with the result. But a strong entity to defend European interests against Chinese etc is clearly desirable. I could see myself voting yes to a European Union on the US model. For example if you lived in California you could have legislation for homosexuals to marry dolphins and a compulsory health-and-safety check every time you went to the jacks, or you could go to Oklahoma and not wear a seatbelt and shoot burglars. We would still have a federal Government and a strong foreign policy. Why can't we have that instead of a Union that concerns itself with micro-legislation and meddling with everyday life?

I honestly believe that the talk about defending European interests against the Chinese was yet one more effort to scare monger the people into voting Yes.

I mean what will happen given that we vote No? What will the Chinese do? And might I say that if we voted Yes, the first thing that would happen is the new European President or whatever his or her title would be, would be on their way over to China with a plane load of businessmen to sign deals and ignore their human rights record and all that.

European politicians in the main could care less about Chinese human rights. But when they see the ordinary person in Europe is concerned, and coinciding with their pet project the Lisbon Treaty, the use the oppertunity to tie the two together and try to scaremonger the people to vote Yes. It's a classic case of the boogeyman coming to get us if we vote NO. Thankfully the people saw through the scaremongering.

[junketman]

[quote=Universal_001]

I voted No on Thursday and I am delighted with the result. But a strong entity to defend European interests against Chinese etc is clearly desirable. I could see myself voting yes to a European Union on the US model. For example if you lived in California you could have legislation for homosexuals to marry dolphins and a compulsory health-and-safety check every time you went to the jacks, or you could go to Oklahoma and not wear a seatbelt and shoot burglars. We would still have a federal Government and a strong foreign policy. Why can't we have that instead of a Union that concerns itself with micro-legislation and meddling with everyday life?

Childlike nationalism still exists.[/quote:210txbke]

If it wasn't for nationalism you and I would be saluting the British Flag over Dublin Castle, swearing allegiance to the Queen if we wanted to work in the public sector, fighting her wars, taking our laws from Westminister.

[Demotruk]

I will absolutely support a federal Europe as long as it is sufficiently democratic. USA is a good starting point but it would still need to be considerably more democratic than the US, which has declined into a state where the two parties are the only possibly electable parties.