nononsense, I'm not defending anything. I'm just pointing out the crap you're talking. "secret interlocking blood-oath societies" - you're a paranoid halfwit. In the same breath as talking about referendums across Europe, you're saying there is no democracy in Europe. What on earth is a referendum if not the ultimate expression of democracy? Spain had a referendum on the Constitution. The Spanish people went out and voted. Why is that so difficult for you?
Hey Nononsense, save your keystrokes. It's no use trying to change a closed mind. Pardon the pun, but these guys will be "enlightened" in their own time. Peace, CB
The dutch referendum is non binding because it is constitutionally not possible to hold a binding referendum. The main parties will uphold the vote if the turnout is above 30%. How do you mean the Spanish people did not have access to 'the third' part of the constitution. The constition can be downloaded from the European website in full (in all european languages). The US constitution was not ratified by all states at the same time, why the hell would the european people have to vote all at once ... ?
Just out of curiosity, could the blacks vote when the US constitution was ratified? And what about the indians? No country has the perfect political model. Although every politician of any majority in any country claims their system is perfect.
From BBC News: Seems not too many bothered surfing on internet to fill in the void. Your argument about the adoption of the US constitution is historically ludicrous. Stick with it as you seem to like it.
Spike, The historical context of the adoption of the US constitution and the birth of the Union is far removed from us in time. The same questions could be asked for any major switch to a new system of law, say the French in 1789. By today's standards, there was no question of universal sufferage at all. Whereas in the US, the process of joining has been a process of free choice insofar the individual states were concerned, no such option existed in France. Suffice it to point to the gruesome submission of the rural 'la Vendée'. All by all, these matters have been decided by the elites of their times. Some truly representative, many not. There is some merit in judging the degree of success of these 18th century adventures in 'Law'. The US has functioned under the same constitution ever since. France is now at its '5th Republic'. So they started over a few times since these days. Many other European states have a much more muddled background in these matters. I'll leave this as an exercise. Perhaps, the current NON-vote is perhaps an indication of the French having grown a bit savvier than most Europeans in such matters, regardless of the way today's commentators try to explain the phenomenon. "The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.". -- H. L. Mencken "By means of shrewd lies, unremittingly repeated, it is possible to make people believe that heaven is hell -- and hell heaven. The greater the lie, the more readily it will be believed." - Adolph Hitler
So what? The Spanish people have a free press. They can read newspapers, they can listen to radio, then can watch television. They can go on the Internet and read anything they want (just as you have done). Every household in Spain received a copy of the EU Consititution. If someone chooses to remain ignorant then that is up to them. If they choose not to vote then that is up to them. That's democracy.
About the french: they are not savvier, they have politicians that agreed to have a referendum; where i live the referendum was refused. We all know why. Since monday we get publicity on the radio about the importance of saying YES to Europe. We all know why. The Netherlands will say NO also next weekend. And in my country we would vote NO also IF we could vote. About Mencken and Hitler: when you reread the text try to think about 9/11 and the way the "continuous islamic danger" was used by Bush to help the weapon industry. Think about the chemical and nuclear danger from Iraq that didn't exist but was invented for other reasons. Think about the scenario to favour the reelection of Bush. This was the ultimate proof that "The greater the lie, the more readily it will be believed." Every day americans get killed in Iraq as a result of the "Hitler tactic".
Yeah spike. I think the French people are indeed a bit savvier. Only Chirac seems to have goofed when he decided on his referendum. Now, he's making poor Raffarin pay for it (following the best precepts of Mencken). Be good, nononsense