Text 7356, 216 rader
Skriven 2010-04-28 09:40:47 av Michiel van der Vlist (2:280/5555)
     Kommentar till en text av Robert Bashe (2:2448/44)
Ärende: Question about democracy
================================
Hello Robert,

On Tuesday April 27 2010 13:22, you wrote to me:

 MV>>>> You do not seem to have much faith in elected representatives.

 RB>>> Now you finally understand me ;-)))

 MV>> I still do not understand why you want to "help" others adopt a
 MV>> system that you yourself have no faith in...

 RB> Who said I wanted to "help" anyone do anything?

You yoursel. "Help" was the word you used when you mentioned the situation in
Zimbabwe. You said we should help the people in Zimbabwe.

 RB> Anyway, I have no faith in elected representatives of _any_
 RB> nationality.

Too bad.

 RB> Don't think that only applies to the States.

You implied it applies to MY country.

 RB> There are some who are better (more honest, concientious, dedicated to
 RB> the public good) than others, but when the party says "vote this way
 RB> or that", they have to vote that way, too.

Yes, it is called party discipline. A result of people voting for a PARTY
rather than for the individual members.

 RB> The constitution in Germany says representatives are only responsible
 RB> to their own conciences, but that's not the way things work in
 RB> practice.

So what? What matter is that if they do things wrong in the eye of the voter,
they pay the price next election.

 RB>>> [The EU "Constitution"]

 MV>> You do not know what you are talking about. *I* know why it failed
 MV>> here. I live here, you do not.

 RB> Who cares? The Dutch voted _against_ the so-called "constitution",

THAT part you got right.

 RB> since they were given a choice and didn't have it rammed down their
 RB> throats by the politicians, as in most of the other EU countries.

No, that was not the reason they rejected it.

 RB> But in the end, the result was that everything got changed, the word
 RB> "constitution" was dropped

What's in a name?

 MV>> How do you "pressure" the voters into voting "in favor"?

 RB> Easy. Just tell them that the EU will go to pot if they don't vote in
 RB> favor,

That only works if the voters believe it. Most voters aren't stupid.

 RB> that their economy will stagnate, that everyone will become poorer

Which, if true, is a very good reason to vote in favour.

 RB>  - and then maybe get a few good rock bands to endorse the "yes"
 RB> vote.

That is called lobbying. Nothing wrong with it.

 RB>  That's just normal politics, Michiel.

And the problem with that is?

Anyway, I voted in favour. Wasn't the first time I voted against the majority
and it won't be the last. I never felt "pressured" in any way.

 RB>>> The EU court can override decisions of the German supreme court,
 RB>>> but not those of the constitutional court.

 MV>> Says who? As I wrote, the dust has not settled yet. We will see
 MV>> how it will work out in the end.

 RB> Michiel, regardless of what you may think, there are _still_ national
 RB> constitutions in force in the EU and they _still_ apply within the
 RB> invidivual countries.

Yes, but we have yet to see it tested. The treaty of Lisboa has only been in
effect for a few month. We have not as yet seen the situation where EU
regulations openly conflicts with national law.

You have not answered the question of: "who says the EU court can not override
decisions of the German constitutional court?"

 RB> Once you get into inter-EU matters, you can cite EU regulations, but
 RB> within a member country, the law of the land is still the law of the
 RB> land.

Yes... so far...

 RB> Why otherwise would the EU want EU Directives implemented in local
 RB> law?

But what will happen if a country openly refuses to implement an EU regulation
in local law? We won't know until it happens...

 RB>>> I personally think any attempt to do so would result in chaos, at
 RB>>> least in Germany.

 MV>> You are not representative for the German people.

 RB> No, but I know how they think, in contrast to you.

Why would you know any better than I? They have been my neighbours for over 60
years. I was already watching German television when you were still living in
the USA.

 MV>>>> I think it will be EASIER in Europe than in the US. We do not
 MV>>>> have that almost pathological aversion against government.

 RB>>> Speak for yourself.

 MV>> Obviously, the "we" did not include you.

 RB> Or quite a number of millions in addition. Why pick on me just because
 RB> I don't fit in your "kowtow to authority" mold?

I do not fit into a "kowtow to authority model" myself. Knowbody I personally
know fits into that model.

As I wrote before, it is a big step from not being saddled with an almost
pathological aversion against government to slavishly follow. Most Europenas I
know stand somewhere in the middle. I pick on you because in my perception you
are the exception. You may have a Gerrman passport, but regarding your attitude
towards government, you still have the mind of a US American.

 MV>> As has been pointed out many times, your attitude is not typical
 MV>> for a European or German. You were raised in the USA and that
 MV>> shows in your attitude.

 RB> Apparently I'll never live that down. The Americans think I'm a Euro,
 RB> and the Euros think I'm an American.

Something similar would have happened to me had I decided not to leave South
Africa in the seventees...

 MV>> I say that typical Amercian aversion against government - that you
 MV>> show too - is a liability.

 RB> Note the sentence above "kowtow to authority"? A good public
 RB> resistance to government and sensitivity to bad government is an
 RB> advantage in my eyes, not a disadvantage

I know. And you think all government is bad. You were born and raised in the
USA. Hard to shake...

 MV>>>> We accept that government and the things that come with it - for
 MV>>>> example taxes - are a necessary evil. Plus that we have a long
 MV>>>> history of living with compromise.

 RB>>> The last sentence is surely true, although European history
 RB>>> doesn't always reflect it, but the docile acceptence of authority
 RB>>> you seem to imply...

 MV>> Those are your words. It is a long leap from "almost pathological
 MV>> aversion against government" to "docile acceptance of authority".

 RB> Are't you confusing me with someone else?

No. I read your rants about the high taxes in Germany and your distrust of
politicians.

 RB>>> ... is not universal in the EU - not even in Germany, the home of
 RB>>> docile acceptance of authority.

 MV>> Never said it was.

 RB> No, I did. I know the people.

Perhaps not as good as you think. I read your rants in the German areas. And
the comments from the Germans...

 MV>> But "we" are not saddled with that typical American allergy
 MV>> against government.

 RB> "You", not "we".

"We", not "me"

 RB> Or is there no opposition to the government in NL?

Of course there is. That is what politics in a democracy is all about isn't it?
Ruling parties and opposition.

But you should not confuse opposition to the sitting powers with aversion to
government _as such_.

 RB> From what I read, there appears to be plenty

Opposition is part and parcel of democracy. It means that differemnt people
have different ideas and express them. That has nothing to do with having no
faith in elected representatives or casting doubt on their integrity.

 RB>  - some of it pretty violent.

What violence?


Cheers, Michiel

--- GoldED+/W32-MINGW 1.1.5-b20070503
 * Origin: http://www.vlist.org (2:280/5555)