Lisbon Treaty

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BohsPartisan

My point being, there is no alternative

---

Right then, that wraps it up for you in this topic I suppose?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GavinZac

Right then, that wraps it up for you in this topic I suppose?

---

Only if your selective quoting was representative. Yet more intellectual dishonesty from yourself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BohsPartisan

Only if your selective quoting was representative. Yet more intellectual dishonesty from yourself.

---

The rest of your post is off-topic guff. What am I to do? We could go on forever about sticking it to the man, but its as irrelevant as it is pointless.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BohsPartisan

If Marx's ideas were so out of date, why was he voted thinker of the Millenium by British academics?

---

Presumably this vote refers to a previous millennium, so the contradiction doesn't arise.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Student Mullet

Presumably this vote refers to a previous millennium, so the contradiction doesn't arise.

---

Similarly, you wouldn't be strung up for nominating Isaac Newton but its not a very good idea to base your ideas on the ephemeral ether because of it.

What I've seen from the coverage since the vote, is the Yes side salivating at the prospect of being given another go to put the democratic will of the electorate in their place.

When you look at the figures, they make very clear reading. A very high turnout, with a very large majority of 110k people that defeated the proposal, by 7% in 33 constituencies. Now, if the yes side think another referendum will be a formality, when they look at those figures, maybe they should reconsider their stance, as there would be no guarantee of the result they demand.

By respecting the decision of the electorate, that would indicate that another referendum is out of the question. Should it not be respected, those of us on the No side have no qualms to vote it down again. The EU has to understand that No doesn't mean maybe, it means No. Full stop. You only have to look at the UK, who will probably complete the process this week, despite widespread anger among the general public, who were not afforded the right to democracy as we were. Magnify that by 25 other countries, and it's clear that 500 million citizens don't want this in their name.

We have and will receive more political support over the coming days and months, for having a democratic vote, and not doing what the rest of the EU is being told to do. While they can bully other countries into caving into their demands, they can't and won't bully us. If Brussels try to confront us at the ballot box, as we've already demonstrated, there will be only one winner, and it won't be them.

Great line earlier in the week, demonstrating the difference between Brian and Barack on the campaign trail. With Barack Obama, it's "yes we can", with Brian, it's "no you can't" :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mypost

With Barack Obama, it's "yes we can"

---

Unashamedly stolen from Bob the Builder. :eek:

Agree with the rest of your post. The more I read on the subject the more I get the feeling that the Treaty just doesn't sit right with ALOT of people - just reading the 82+ pages of the "your comment" section on bbc.com will tell you that. Craziness aside (abortions, gay marriage etc :rolleyes: ) theres just something askew with it. :confused:

Since Ireland rejected it, the fact the EU now seem DESPARATE to "pass it anway" is kinda disconcerting...does that not bother YES voters? Why the desparation?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mypost

What I've seen from the coverage since the vote, is the Yes side salivating at the prospect of being given another go to put the democratic will of the electorate in their place.

---

I haven't seen this at all. In fact, many on the Yes side have said that another vote is out of the question.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mypost

You only have to look at the UK, who will probably complete the process this week, despite widespread anger among the general public, who were not afforded the right to democracy as we were. Magnify that by 25 other countries, and it's clear that 500 million citizens don't want this in their name. .

---

Interesting maths.
And as for democracy, what is happening in Britain is absolutely democratic. The British public elected a party that is pro-Lisbon Treaty. The main opposition is anti-Lisbon yet didn't get elected. Thats democracy working the way its intended.

What arguably is undemocratic is putting a complex legal document to a referendum when many of the voters are, for whatever reason, ignorant of its detail, meaning and implications.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mypost

We have and will receive more political support over the coming days and months, for having a democratic vote, and not doing what the rest of the EU is being told to do. While they can bully other countries into caving into their demands, they can't and won't bully us. If Brussels try to confront us at the ballot box, as we've already demonstrated, there will be only one winner, and it won't be them.

Great line earlier in the week, demonstrating the difference between Brian and Barack on the campaign trail. With Barack Obama, it's "yes we can", with Brian, it's "no you can't" :D

---

Complete and utter aspirational claptrap with no substance. And to prove it, you quoted the master of vague aspirational claptrap, "Mr change" himself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BohsPartisan

Do you think those guys rule anything? They're just puppets. The ruling elite are the corporations, the banks, the media, and unelected bodies like the EU commission. In particular the corporations make the big decisions that effect our lives. They control production and distribution of goods and services.

---

Yes. They pass the laws. Therefore they rule. Who do you think runs the "banks" and the "corporations"? Just ordinary shams. If you want to control production set up a corporation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OneRedArmy

If you subscribe to the view (I don't, but clearly many do) that in terms of costs vs benefits of EU membership, we are or are moving towards a negative marginal position (interest rates, fishing, immigration etc.) then the anti-EU feeling is only going to increase.

---

Cowen will be looking for someone (anyone?) to blame for the downturn. Rather than try and blame the opposition, which is the normal FF way, he know has the perfect out - The people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OneRedArmy

Its clear the Irish electorate ignored the "Europe has been good to us so vote yes" argument (with some good reason) and if people are looking to see where the EU will benefit Ireland going forward its hard to make a clear case.

---

Clearly it should be part of the argument. The problem was it was the only argument that the yes side put up.

I believe the power of political parties can be illustrated by their policies/manifestos.There is hardly a cigarette paper between them and that is even the opposition parties that we all know will change little if elected.Can anyone come up with a policy from one of the mainstream parties that would upset or even inconvience big business or the banks that have caused the credit crunch.The main parties in ireland do not even have much influence with the electorate which is probably a good thing

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by seanfhear

I believe the power of political parties can be illustrated by their policies/manifestos.There is hardly a cigarette paper between them and that is even the opposition parties that we all know will change little if elected.Can anyone come up with a policy from one of the mainstream parties that would upset or even inconvience big business or the banks that have caused the credit crunch.The main parties in ireland do not even have much influence with the electorate which is probably a good thing

---

I think you are talking about ordinary peoples greed. In this country the banks lent money to people who were only too willing to take it. People paid stupid sums for houses on the basis that the prices will go up indefinitely. :rolleyes:
(It reminds me of the Eircom shares and people wanted compensation cause the price went down. It was the "governments" fault for telling them it was a sure thing. )
No point blaming the government as they have got voted in by the people every election for the last ten years.

Human greed.This is the trait of humans that i just cannot get my head around.We all know that unbridled greed will lead to our destruction.I believe that it is a disease like alcoholism or drug addiction but we have not celebrated these problems like we have the pursuit of happiness through avarice

Interesting to see the survey in todays paper (i think the Examiner did it?) on why people voted No. Shocked that 75% of No voters thought this could be renegotiated. Renegotiating would only work if actually knew why people voted No i.e. concrete reason.

The one good thing to come out of the No vote is a big discussion on Irelands future in the EU & where we see that going. We really should have been having that discussion 6 months ago.

I think a two tier EU is inevitable eventually. When the Euro was introduced that paved the way for countries to opt out of major decisions. It is probably a logical way to progress as will be difficult to get 27 countries to agree on everything & also the most democratic way forward. Ireland has a choice to make now on how we proceed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pete

Interesting to see the survey in todays paper (i think the Examiner did it?) on why people voted No. Shocked that 75% of No voters thought this could be renegotiated.

---

It's in the Indo, with btw nothing to back the opening paragraphs claim of people believing it could be "easily" renegotiated in the figures given. If you had a problem with part of the treaty, why wouldn't you want it renegotiated?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pete

Renegotiating would only work if actually knew why people voted No i.e. concrete reason.

---

If that question was actually asked - the report doesn't say whether it was or wasn't

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OneRedArmy

...And as for democracy, what is happening in Britain is absolutely democratic. The British public elected a party that is pro-Lisbon Treaty. The main opposition is anti-Lisbon yet didn't get elected. Thats democracy working the way its intended...

---

They elected a party whose manifesto promised a referendum. That promise would be reason enough for a no voter to ignore the party position on Europe and focus on the other issues, from tax to healthcare to crime. To suggest that an opinion of majority party is also held by the majority of the public is disingenuous. Furthermore, the first past the post system used in British elections greatly exaggerates Labour's popularity. Your argument on this point is entirely facetious.

Oh, man. I voted with Sinn Fein and Coir, lunatics of all flavours, ignorant people and stupid people. That's okay. I can accept that in a binary decision, I'm going to vote with some nutters. But arguing on the same side as Mypost? I feel dirty.

Having voted 'no' last week...expect that i'll most likely vote 'yes' next time, churlish, childish,immature, or subtle and smart whatever your take on it I don't care...but suggest the 'yes' politicians might try and find out how many others might do the same (assuming of course some cosmetic chages are made to the Treaty to make it easy for 'no' voters to justify to themselves a 'yes'vote) anyone feel the same or think what I've outlined is realistic... and if you don't like my principles well i've got another few sets

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by John83

To suggest that an opinion of majority party is also held by the majority of the public is disingenuous.

---

Well said that man.

The argument that if the government party (and in Ireland's case, also the opposition) have a stance on a particular issue, this is always an accurate reflection of the majority of the people in the country, is a flawed argument.
The idea that Ireland is going against the wishes of 500 million Europeans is based on that argument, but in three countries (the only 3?) where the current proposals (or very similar proposals and under a different name) were put to a referendum, the voters refused to pass it.

The idea that we should also trust the people behind the treaty on the basis that they surely know what is better for us than we do ourselves is another argument that has very little merit for me. I don't trust any politician blindly.

And finally, the idea that an issue such as this is too important to be left to an uninformed voting public is ludicrous, and entirely undemocratic. That said, the voting public have a responsibility to inform themselves of the issue. To blame somebody else for their own lack of understanding of what the treaty is about it a pretty lame excuse.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by osarusan

The argument that if the government party (and in Ireland's case, also the opposition) have a stance on a particular issue, this is always an accurate reflection of the majority of the people in the country, is a flawed argument.

---

It's not always an accurate reflection, but it is the way a democracy should run. In England, for example, the voting public know that Labour are vastly more pro-European than their Tory counterparts, and were voted in ahead of the Tories in the last national election. I would assume that the people who voted for them would know this obvious fact, and so I would assume they were happy for the Labour party to deal with the upcoming Lisbon Treaty. If they then are unhappy with the way Labour has shaped Britain's foreign policy then they can exercise their frustration by voting for the Tories, the Lib Dems, Respect or whoever they wish, in the hopes of changing that direction. That's the way democracy has been run, and that is the way democracy should continue to run.

Putting a complex Treaty to a public that means little to many, or that don't understand it whilst being whipped up by campaigns of lies and scaremongering (on both sides), with very actual debate on the matter is ridiculous in the extreme

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jebus

In England, for example, the voting public know that Labour are vastly more pro-European than their Tory counterparts, and were voted in ahead of the Tories in the last national election. I would assume that the people who voted for them would know this obvious fact, and so I would assume they were happy for the Labour party to deal with the upcoming Lisbon Treaty.

---

They promised a referendum on Lisbon and then changed their minds after the election. That's hardly democracy.