World Politics

[Buffalo Soldier]

...curious, are you using the ASTM Correctness Standard for your analysis or are you simply using the BS ( Buffalo Soldier ) Standard...?....

Cheers

See my post above.
Back to content please.

 

[del1962]

I have to be honest, I have never heard of this referendum, but I assume it is clear that there is a big difference between independence movement of small and often poorer parts of a country (Scotland, Kosovo) that often feel they are being oppressed, versus larger and/or richer parts of a country (Flanders, North of Italy, Bavaria) that press for independence since they feel the rest of the country "takes their money"

The Scots feel that the the rest of the UK lives of their oil, so in their minds (the SNP) it is like the Lombardy League etc, however because of the Barnett formulae they get more money out of the UK than the poorer regions in the North of England.

If Scotland setting itself adrift meant the regions of England would do better I would hope they leave (the Scots are annoying bunch full of there own sense of self importance), but alas I don't think their leaving will benefit anyone but London

 

[TheSpud]

It's a whole context. The aim is to create a Europe of regions, in which the smaller regions will directly communicate with the EU commission and in which there will be no more room left for the "member states" as we know them today. And in such context blessed are those who were born in rich regions like Catalunya, Alsace or Flanders while the Andalucians, the Auvergnats or the Campanians, too bad for them.

Truly frightening, and something that will tear the EU apart. The whole thing needs reforming from top down - we (the populus) voted to join a trading union, not a political one. Remember what happened a few years back when Ireland (I think it was Ireland) voted in a referendum against a new EU treaty? The EU told them to hold another referendum ...

Democracy is a wonderful thing, until it seems it gives the politicians an answer they dont like.

 

[TheSpud]

there are different theories and opinions...i'd reason they would want to join the eurozone first (edit: i mean to adopt the euro wich apparently is possible without the eu/eurozone membership) since leaving the pound as their national currency would de facto tie their economy to the british one. something the pro independence supporters consider a liability. also, their eu membership desire may run contrary to the designs of some members like spain who would hate to see catalonia follow the scottish example. so, the eu membership could be not up to independent scotland.

Correct - any country can choose to use any currency they like, the issue with using someone elses is that you dont have your own central bank that can help you by controlling interest rates, or acting as a lender of last resort.

Witness what happened a couple of years back in the Eurozone with Greece, Portugal, etc. Its why as part of Monetary Union there had to be economic convergence, especially around deficits. Of course in the end the EU fudged the assessments & rules and the countries themselves lied so they could adopt the Euro. They then continued to flout the convergence rules afterwards. All of which was predicted (with incredible accuracy) by the Eurosceptics in the UK - who, IMO, were disgracefully portrayed as Jingoistic, racist, xenophobes.

 

[TheSpud]

nah, it would just change the equilibrium on the spectrum. Like the market theory, that the traditionally left politicians would be skewed further to centre-right, and the right would be given leeway to skew further to the right like America.

Effecively, the centre has moved to a centre-right, a position the Dems occupy in the US.

Labor will just need to further b@stardise their third way. lets call it the fourth way shall we? i hate that muppet tony blair. the great communicator my @rse. third way my @rse. New Britannia my @rse. Noel Gallahger my @rse.

In the short term Laurel is right (no pun intended). But you're right - Labour would have to recraft their message to appeal to the English electorate by moving more to the current centre.

There are some absolutely fascinating situations that could arise - a Yes next week followed by a small Labour victory in May (that relies on Scottish MPs) for instance.

 

[TheSpud]

If the Scots vote for independence they will want to join the EU.

Personally I would prefer if they didn't go independent (even though it will save the rest of the UK money), but it is their choice.

They will either have to join the Euro, just use an existing currency with no control over it (same as joining the Euro) or create their own new currency (if they want real independence)

If they request EU membership then they must also commit to joining the Euro - its in the Lisbon treaty. They dont have to join immediately but they must commit (or negotiate an opt out like the UK has).

 

[rhubroma]

Truly frightening, and something that will tear the EU apart. The whole thing needs reforming from top down - we (the populus) voted to join a trading union, not a political one. Remember what happened a few years back when Ireland (I think it was Ireland) voted in a referendum against a new EU treaty? The EU told them to hold another referendum ...

Democracy is a wonderful thing, until it seems it gives the politicians an answer they dont like.

Then, as the current crisis demonstrates, it was better to have no union at all. Undoubtedly so as to the last statement, though I would add the strong powers above the political class first and foremost.

The situation as it stands is that within the union, because there is no political, cultural, or democratic cohesion, each country is set adrift when it comes to policy matters that have nothing to do with the market, but must conform to the mandates of the CEB and Brussels when implementing the austerity measures and econ-structural reforms. With all the implications for the Alpha-states vs. the so called PIGS this entails.

The EU, as a result, is a lame-duck and can't even set down a universal foreign policy in matters of war and peace, or immigration for example.

 

[del1962]

If they request EU membership then they must also commit to joining the Euro - its in the Lisbon treaty. They dont have to join immediately but they must commit (or negotiate an opt out like the UK has).

If they didn't need a currency then they could just make a commitment to join the Euro and make sure they never have to join, but they will need something so the euro may be their best choice.

What really annoys me is UK politicians currently offering them bribes to stay, if they want to go, let them go, but I don't want them staying with even more special priviledges draining tht rest of the UK even more than they already do

 

[TheSpud]

If they didn't need a currency then they could just make a commitment to join the Euro and make sure they never have to join, but they will need something so the euro may be their best choice.

Yes, there is that option. I'm not sure what provisions / rules there are to make a country join after committing to it.

What really annoys me is UK politicians currently offering them bribes to stay, if they want to go, let them go, but I don't want them staying with even more special priviledges draining tht rest of the UK even more than they already do

I agree.

 

[TheSpud]

Then, as the current crisis demonstrates, it was better to have no union at all. Undoubtedly so as to the last statement, though I would add the strong powers above the political class first and foremost.

The situation as it stands is that within the union, because there is no political, cultural, or democratic cohesion, each country is set adrift when it comes to policy matters that have nothing to do with the market, but must conform to the mandates of the CEB and Brussels when implementing the austerity measures and econ-structural reforms. With all the implications for the Alpha-states vs. the so called PIGS this entails.

The EU, as a result, is a lame-duck and can't even set down a universal foreign policy in matters of war and peace, or immigration for example.

This is especially so - and its one of the fundamental reasons why the Euro was never going to work. There are starkly different mindsets when it comes to fiscal prudence across the countries, coupled with the EU bending the rules on budgets, etc.

I think what a lot of people don't realise is that the so called 'EU bailouts' of Ireland, Portugal, etc. were primarily funded by Germany which is why the is a growing rump of dissatisfaction there with the EU.

 

[Jagartrott]

I think what a lot of people don't realise is that the so called 'EU bailouts' of Ireland, Portugal, etc. were primarily funded by Germany which is why the is a growing rump of dissatisfaction there with the EU.

This is incredibly simplistic and doesn't acknowledge that Germany profited a lot from being in the EU and the Euro at the expense of Southern European countries.

 

[rhubroma]

This is especially so - and its one of the fundamental reasons why the Euro was never going to work. There are starkly different mindsets when it comes to fiscal prudence across the countries, coupled with the EU bending the rules on budgets, etc.

I think what a lot of people don't realise is that the so called 'EU bailouts' of Ireland, Portugal, etc. were primarily funded by Germany which is why the is a growing rump of dissatisfaction there with the EU.

Yes, while Germany also received copious assistance at the time of reunification and a market to "sell it cars and appliances."

Hence the growing dissatisfaction, for opposite reasons, has indeed grown within the EU.

 

[TheSpud]

This is incredibly simplistic and doesn't acknowledge that Germany profited a lot from being in the EU and the Euro at the expense of Southern European countries.

I agree it is simplistic, one of the chief points being that Germany joined the Euro at Deutschemark rate that made their exports incredibly competitive.

However, in the intervening years they have been incredibly restrained both from a personal level (accepting below inflation wage increases, etc.) and a government level (little / no budget deficits). This came after a decade of sacrifices to fund the reunification of East & West.

At the same time a lot of the Southern countries began acting like kids in a sweet shop chucking money around, awarding huge public sector pay rises, etc. having seen their interest rates almost half overnight. At the same time ignoring structural reforms that they should have been making.

The EU hierarchy were complicit in this by allowing it and not enforcing the rules.

 

[rhubroma]

I agree it is simplistic, one of the chief points being that Germany joined the Euro at Deutschemark rate that made their exports incredibly competitive.

However, in the intervening years they have been incredibly restrained both from a personal level (accepting below inflation wage increases, etc.) and a government level (little / no budget deficits). This came after a decade of sacrifices to fund the reunification of East & West.

At the same time a lot of the Southern countries began acting like kids in a sweet shop chucking money around, awarding huge public sector pay rises, etc. having seen their interest rates almost half overnight. At the same time ignoring structural reforms that they should have been making.

The EU hierarchy were complicit in this by allowing it and not enforcing the rules.

That is only part of the truth. The southern countries lost their fiscal independence, which caused incredible damage (drop in competitively, loss of foreign investments, wage decreases, job market closures, the Euro causing living costs to double overnight), while at the same time have been placed under the EU austerity lash wielded by Germany.

Such that to the average southerner, who isn't responsible for what his government does, the sacrifices already made with no return for them, but rather only increasing hardship, finds it very hard to digest condescending accusations of behaving like little kids from countries whose industry made out decidedly better in the deal.

 

[TheSpud]

That is only part of the truth. The southern countries lost their fiscal independence, which caused incredible damage (drop in competitively, loss of foreign investments, wage decreases, job market closures, the Euro causing living costs to double overnight), while at the same time have been placed under the EU austerity lash wielded by Germany.

Such that to the average southerner, who isn't responsible for what his government does, the sacrifices already made with no return for them, but rather only increasing hardship, finds it very hard to digest condescending accusations of behaving like little kids from countries whose industry made out decidedly better in the deal.

Indeed, it is a fascinating subject to discuss, and gets very emotive depending on which nationalities you are talking to. Many of these problems wouldn't have happened had the Euro convergence criteria been adhered to. If they had then only about four countries would have qualified for membership - ironically the UK being one of them!

It just goes to show that the decisions were made on a political basis rather than an economic basis - another reason for EU reform.

 

[python]

just released (about an hour ago)

Preliminary report - Crash involving Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777-200 flight MH17

unsurprisingly, depending on how one's mind was set up, people only read those commentaries and quotes that meet their opinions.

here's the opportunity to read the prime source...that's what i am doing now.

http://www.onderzoeksraad.nl/upload...3acad0ceprem-rapport-mh-17-en-interactief.pdf

 

[blutto]

...there is this Saker guy that has become prominent in the Ukrainian crisis...here is his latest, this on the current ceasefire...

...one of the more pointed comments...

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"I sure despise the Putin-bashers not only for their short-sightedness and lack of expertise, but for their mind-blowing intellectual dishonesty. They are like a broken record constantly repeating "Putin betrayed, Putin betrayed, Putin betrayed". In Russia this kind of rabid nationalists are called "горе патриоты" or "sorrow-patriots". They are the kind that never actually do anything useful, but are the most vociferous about what should be done. I want to make it clear that I am not referring to Strelkov, Mozgovoi or any other real patriot who happens to disagree with Putin. I am referring to those for whom Putin-bashing is an end in itself and who basically don't give a damn as long as they get to bash the man."

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

....from...
http://vineyardsaker.blogspot.ca/2014/09/ukrainian-ceasefire-q-and-rfc.html

Cheers

 

[Echoes]

OK, I'll go over this one by one, seems the easiest.

Should I understand that you meant "50% of my post_" (in the singular) was incorrect? Because you said "50% of my postS". Okay everybody can make mistakes but it can lead to misunderstandings...

The aim of whom? "the" Scottish? All of the pro-scottish independence politicians? One of the multiple pro-regional European fractions?
It might be an aim of many, but definitely not the ultimate aim of all

of the EU Commission via the "Association of European Border Regions" (mentioned below), which it promotes and the Assembly of European Regions which the AEBR is a member of. A very influential network to the Commission.

The SNP is a member of the EFA and you know it full well. Which means that they are pro-EU and "Europe of regions" advocates.

There were press conferences with Obama & Cameron, where Obama made clear his support of an United UK, and his opposition to the Scottish independence

Yes but there they just ... talked. What is clear is that Cameron recalled his decision to hold a referendum for UK exit from the EU while the Scottish referendum for "independence" will take place.

By the way, the US are a driving force behind the regionalization of Europe. Divide & Conquer !

Excerpts from Pdt Clinton's speech when receiving the Karlspreis in 2000:

"European unity really is producing something new under the sun -- common institutions that are bigger than the nation-state, and at the same time, a devolution of democratic authority downward. Scotland and Wales have their own parliaments. This week, Northern Ireland, where my family has its roots, restored its new government. Europe is alive with the sound of ancient place names being spoken again -- Catalonia, Piedmont, Lombardy, Silesia, Transylvania, Uthenia -- not in the name of separatism, but in the spirit of healthy pride and heritage.

National sovereignty is being enriched by lively local voices making Europe safer for diversity, reaffirming our common humanity, reducing the chance that European disunity will embroil Europe and America in another large conflict."
http://www.karlspreis.de/preistraeger/2000/rede_von_bill_clinton_englisch.html

As if our government went to America promoting the Navajo or the French Cajun regional identities... May they mind their own business

Not a map by the European Greens. It's a map of the Greens/EFA, with EFA being the progressive (mostly left wing) regionalist fraction in the European Parliament.

by the EFA, so Green approved...

Didn't know it, but a quick internet search doesn't really support the image you sketch. It seems to me they don't want to create new regions, but merely promote in-region cooperation (also if this means cross border cooperation)

Cross border cooperation is the core idea of the EU, so I don't really see the problem.

You were saying I was incorrect but now you admit you did not know what I was talking about.

Excerpts from the European Charter for BORDER AND CROSS-BORDER REGIONS (p.8)

"Consequently, the goal of cooperation in border and cross-border regions is not to create a new administrative level, but instead to develop cooperative structures, procedures and instruments that facilitate the removal of obstacles and foster the elimination of divisive factors. The ultimate objective is to transcend borders and reduce their importance to mere administrative boundaries. In the context of ongoing European integration and stronger area-wide economic cooperation in the 'new' Europe, people in border regions will then also be able to assert their right to equal living conditions, free movement and improved mobility at the de facto interfaces of European integration. Apart from treaties, EU regulations, funding programs, and co-operation structures, the political will is essential for the success of cross-border co-operation on national as well as on regional/local level."

Roughly what I said.

I really don't see it. For me, it's mostly interesting.

As I said it's a divide a conquer strategy. A united nation can easily exit the EU one day, for a region, it's harder. Beside if regions emancipate from member states, that's because they (predominantly rich regions) no longer want to pay for the poorer regions of their respective countries. It's not the kind of society I want to live in.

Beside the regionalism, you also have the promotion of regional dialects that in many parts are no longer even spoken. The "préfecture" of the "Pyrenées orientales" "département" is promoting Catalan again, against centuries old French laws, while at the same time the French "socialist" government passed a law to promote English at universities. The official languages of member states are undermined both from above (English) and from below (local dialects).

It's very telling that Catalunyan demonstrator have as slogan "we want a Catalan state." That does not sound very Catalan to me.

Truly frightening, and something that will tear the EU apart. The whole thing needs reforming from top down - we (the populus) voted to join a trading union, not a political one. Remember what happened a few years back when Ireland (I think it was Ireland) voted in a referendum against a new EU treaty? The EU told them to hold another referendum ...

No. The "populus" voted to join a political union and were wrong. The people can make mistakes. Besides I can see that the Brits have interests in a strictly trading union but it's not in the continent's interests (neither is the political union). The EU is a flop, whether economically or politically or legally but right from the start it was meant to be what it now is. Changing Europe has been a slogan for every party at every European elections for over 30 years now but nothing changes because Europe cannot be any different than what it is.

 

[Buffalo Soldier]

Should I understand that you meant "50% of my post_" (in the singular) was incorrect? Because you said "50% of my postS". Okay everybody can make mistakes but it can lead to misunderstandings...

Typo indeed, and a bad one. Sorry for that.

 

[hrotha]

Echoes, that banner with the English slogan is meant for an international audience. It's not "very telling". Also, the notion that French is threatened by all the dialects it went out of its way to root out is silly.

 

[Hawkwood]

What will the UK be called if it's no longer a UK?

The term United Kingdom refers to the linking together of the two historic kingdoms of England and Scotland, if one leaves should the name change?

 

[TheSpud]

The term United Kingdom refers to the linking together of the two historic kingdoms of England and Scotland, if one leaves should the name change?

I don't think it ever will - people are so used to saying 'The UK'. Also UK does mean United Kingdom of Great Britain & Northern Ireland (I think Wales was classed as part of England at the time of the 1707 Act of Union, and clearly NI was later), so maybe the definition of GB should change to just being England & Wales? It will still be great in my view!

I don't think the Union Flag should change either - again its just so recognisable, even if the blue comes from the Saltire.

Its an interesting question though - somehow I don't think its going to be top of people's minds if Scotland vote Yes next week.

 

[Hawkwood]

I don't think it ever will - people are so used to saying 'The UK'. Also UK does mean United Kingdom of Great Britain & Northern Ireland (I think Wales was classed as part of England at the time of the 1707 Act of Union, and clearly NI was later), so maybe the definition of GB should change to just being England & Wales? It will still be great in my view!

I don't think the Union Flag should change either - again its just so recognisable, even if the blue comes from the Saltire.

Its an interesting question though - somehow I don't think its going to be top of people's minds if Scotland vote Yes next week.

Yes Wales was not defined as a kingdom as it was/is a principality held of the medieval English kings. `Great Britain' came from the old French term `Grande Bretagne', that was used to discriminate between the lands of the Celts in Bretagne in France, and those in the British Isles.

If the yes vote wins I think we're going to have one massive mess to sort out!

 

[Jagartrott]

Go Scotland, liberate yourself from that neo-liberal, class-based society!

 

[TheSpud]

Yes Wales was not defined as a kingdom as it was/is a principality held of the medieval English kings. `Great Britain' came from the old French term `Grande Bretagne', that was used to discriminate between the lands of the Celts in Bretagne in France, and those in the British Isles.

If the yes vote wins I think we're going to have one massive mess to sort out!

And the bigger the mess the bigger the slice of future oil revenue we should demand to help sort it out ...