Why I'm thinking of voting yes this time to Lisbon

Nostradamus

Nostradamus wrote: »

Watch though. I'll be banned and my posts deleted by some "moderator" who considers themselves enlightened and progessive cos they watch Vincent Browne.

Thats the way the cookie crumbles here though, you need to learn how to fight the system from within.

But this whole politics thing is scary.

Edit: I'm pretty sure that Nesf is a civil servant... and high enough up one. At least you know your views have been seen though.

democrates

cozmik wrote: »

Fear Fear Fear Blah Blah Blah

You just don't give up do you?

I'm doing fine myself actually and am in a position to weather what comes, thanks to a quarter century of not giving up

Others are not so economically fortified, what do you foresee for them in each possible outcome of the second referendum?

K-9

Nostradamus wrote: »

Oh come on now. There are more plants in here than in the Botanic Gardens.

Indeed, I could continue the plant analogy but I better not!

Good to see the usual quality posts from the No side though, full of substance and facts.

It's becoming more and more the CT forum of politics.

Nostradamus

democrates wrote: »

I'm doing fine myself actually and am in a position to weather what comes, thanks to a quarter century of not giving up

Others are not so economically fortified, what do you foresee for them in each possible outcome of the second referendum?

NEVER STOP TELLING IT LIKE IS IS. Scorn and riddicle is a weapon that the politicial and social elite in Ireland have used for decades to silence the truth.

This is the only weapon they have when you think about it. Make sure to make your feelings known about Lisbon II to everyone you meet. Why not, the pro-Lisbon shower do not restrain themselves from pushing their propoganda, and they are also the ones who do ALL the ridiculing and smarmy comments. Often using your taxes to pay for it. Honestly, am I the only person in Ireland who is sickened by the slithering Dick Roche calling Irish people morons for not following his personal wishes and setting him up with a cushy job in the EU?

The truth will set us all free. This country is in a shocking state right now and the people who led us here are the same ones who told us to vote Ireland deeper into the EU every single time. If that isn't a wake up call, then I do not know what is.

Frankly, for me it has come down to the reality than anyone in Ireland who is pro-EU really needs to hand in their citizenship and move to a totallitarian state because they obviously have a serious issue with democracy and national self determination. That fact that a YES vote is the top agenda for all our corrupt mainstream media, politicians and tycoons tells you all you really need to know about what the EU is really like.

The choice is easy enough; you either want to be Irish citizen, or live under the mandate of some bizzare unelected EU Commission.

Nostradamus

Nostradamus wrote: »

Frankly, for me it has come down to the reality than anyone in Ireland who is pro-EU really needs to hand in their citizenship and move to a totallitarian state because they obviously have a serious issue with democracy and national self determination. That fact that a YES vote is the top agenda for all our corrupt mainstream media, politicians and tycoons tells you all you really need to know about what the EU is really like.

Finally, someone speaking sense.

Have you evidence of this though - we will need it we are to convince other people of this truth.

democrates

Nostradamus wrote: »

I would not get too worried about what people on this board think as they are more than likely connected to the incresingly obsolete Irish polticial/corporate media structure which has no relevence to Irish society as a whole anymore.

Ireland is changing fast.

I don't really care what connections or formal positions other posters have, it's the points they make that are of interest. Anyway in a small country 'connections' are unavoidable, we're probably down to 3 degrees of seperation.

For the record I've no political or corporate affiliations, I'm a busy sole trader these days, was once a civil servant but not high up, HEO was as far as I got. Care to lay your cards on the table?

I agree that Ireland is changing fast and there is a disconnect between many of the powerful and the rest of us. However the prospect of toppling the government and/or sticking it to them by rejecting Lisbon reminds me of Marx's prescription in the communist manifesto to abolish private property - it was so focussed on disempowering the elite that the question of freedom and prosperity for the many became subsidiary.

If I only looked at the long game and ignored the current circumstances I'd vote No again. Parking the ratm reaction and thinking about the balance of probability of what's likely to happen after another no, I'm seeing far too much risk.

cozmik

democrates wrote: »

I'm doing fine myself actually and am in a position to weather what comes, thanks to a quarter century of not giving up

Hmmm, For someone who won't be affected either way you seem to be trying very hard to convince people the end is nigh if we vote no.

Just doing you're civic duty I suppose? lol

turgon

Nostradamus wrote: »

Frankly, for me it has come down to the reality than anyone in Ireland who is pro-EU really needs to hand in their citizenship and move to a totallitarian state because they obviously have a serious issue with democracy and national self determination.

I was wondering how long before you would play the democracy card. Do you consider the Lisbon Treaty more undemocratic than Nice, bearing in mind the former gives more power to parliament?

But ye, I do have a problem with "national self determination". It pointless.

djpbarry

Nostradamus wrote: »

Watch though. I'll be banned and my posts deleted by some "moderator" who considers themselves enlightened and progessive cos they watch Vincent Browne.

“Enlightened” and “Vincent Browne” do not belong in the same sentence.

Nostradamus wrote: »

Make sure to make your feelings known about Lisbon II to everyone you meet.

How about you make them known here first? Unless I am very much mistaken, nothing you have posted so far bears any relevance to the treaty itself.

Nostradamus wrote: »

Why not, the pro-Lisbon shower do not restrain themselves from pushing their propoganda, and they are also the ones who do ALL the ridiculing and smarmy comments.

You’ll notice that well-constructed ‘No’ arguments, such as those from democrates, are not subject to ridicule. “Arguments” such as yours however, well that’s a different story.

Nostradamus wrote: »

Often using your taxes to pay for it.

Taxes do not pay for referendum campaigns.

Nostradamus wrote: »

Honestly, am I the only person in Ireland who is sickened by the slithering Dick Roche calling Irish people morons for not following his personal wishes and setting him up with a cushy job in the EU?

Were Dick Roche (or anyone else for that matter) to say such a thing, I would be quite appalled. But unless I am very much mistaken, he never has.

Nostradamus wrote: »

This country is in a shocking state right now and the people who led us here are the same ones who told us to vote Ireland deeper into the EU every single time. If that isn't a wake up call…

It’s not. Misassociation (on your part) is what it is.

Nostradamus wrote: »

Frankly, for me it has come down to the reality than anyone in Ireland who is pro-EU really needs to hand in their citizenship and move to a totallitarian state because they obviously have a serious issue with democracy and national self determination.

A rather bizarre statement, seeing as how we (the people) voted to join the EU and have approved every treaty since by popular referendum.

democrates

cozmik wrote: »

Hmmm, For someone who won't be affected either way you seem to be trying very hard to convince people the end is nigh if we vote no.

Just doing you're civic duty I suppose? lol

That wasn't me draped in a tricolour making speeches on O'Connell St., it was my twin brother, honest.

Thing is I may do fine myself either way but while the news media are already telling it reports from my family, friends, and contacts are that things are very unstable and people are losing their jobs left right and centre, including young families who required both parents earning to get their mortgages.

Meanwhile half the developers and golden bankers are teeing off in Quinto do Lago and our government are making the colossal mistake of trying to make the necessary changes in sequence instead of at once (the major changes like increasing the top rate of tax, the detailed stuff can follow after). Their whole presentation has been piecemeal between dail and media snippets when an Obama style comprehensive address is called for.

The current approach is intensifying the sense of injustice for those first up and the government are losing credibility in trying to sell the idea that we're all doing this together. If their idea is to spread out the pain over time to minimise election day backlash it's backfiring, there'd be less protest if a perception of fairness and a clear way forward prevailed.

So I'm no apologist for politicians or corporate interests, on the contrary I award them most of the blame for the mess we're in and I'll likely vote against FF again at the locals for many reasons.

Sand

As I said at the time of the first Lisbon treaty vote, Ireland needs the EU more than the EU needs Ireland. The EU project does not exist to serve only Irish interests or hysterical pseudo Irish agendas. Hubris blinded people at that time.

Its unsurprising that reality has hit like a ton of bricks recently.

K-9

Sand wrote: »

As I said at the time of the first Lisbon treaty vote, Ireland needs the EU more than the EU needs Ireland. The EU project does not exist to serve only Irish interests or hysterical pseudo Irish agendas. Hubris blinded people at that time.

Its unsurprising that reality has hit like a ton of bricks recently.

The ECB was one of the gripes in the last Referendum.

I think people now see how good the Euro and the ECB is. Yes, it isn't perfect, but overall, we'd be fecked without it.

Yes, that has nothing to do with Lisbon but as with most things in the recession, you appreciate things you took for granted.

cbreeze

We are ok with economic union, but once the EU wanders into politics this causes problems for us. We don't like the big Brussels bouncer on the door blocking our way to the top table. The big boys will let us in sometimes, but that is not enough for little mickey sleeveen!

K-9

cbreeze wrote: »

but once the EU wanders into politics this causes problems for us. We don't like the big Brussels bouncer on the door blocking our way to the top table. The big boys will let us in sometimes, but that is not enough for little mickey sleeveen!

Ah, I can see through the politicking. When you see that, there is no big Bouncer at the door!

Scofflaw

cbreeze wrote: »

We are ok with economic union, but once the EU wanders into politics this causes problems for us. We don't like the big Brussels bouncer on the door blocking our way to the top table. The big boys will let us in sometimes, but that is not enough for little mickey sleeveen!

Hmm. Is it unkind of me to ask what that actually means? What "top table"? What "Brussels bouncer"?

puzzled,
Scofflaw

Can we rename this thread "Yes to Lisbon" ? The "No to Lisbon" thread reminds me of the posters around the Nice treaty ("You will lose. Power. Money. Influence." Remember them? Remember what happened 1st time round?)

molloyjh

Nostradamus wrote: »

Scofflaw is gas, he is really just a pro-EU extemist survivialist.

Scofflaw has proven time and again to have a far superior understanding of the EU and the Lisbon Treaty than pretty much anyone else here. You on the other hand are off rambling about the media and politicians crazy conspiracy against us. Take a breath there before you do yourself an injury.

Personally I couldn't give a monkies about what the politicians or the press want. I've never had much time or trust for either shower. I prefer to trust my own judgement, and that's why I'm voting Yes in the next referendum. The Lisbon Treaty is the correct choice for this country based on its merits and its merits alone. If you want to have your opinion poisoned by external factors to Lisbon then please feel free, but don't try and suggest that all those that are voting for it are somehow involved in this mad conspiracy against the masses orchastrated (sp?) by the politicians and the press. I prefer complete strangers not presume they have any idea of what drives me thanks.

And taking a leaf from Scofflaws book.....

Somewhat digruntled and amazed by the drama-queens shouting for a No,
molloyjh.

O'Coonassa

The EU sucks a good deal because of corporatism, its foreign and trade policy, and it's whole anti-democratic stance on the new constitution. I write to it and it's members, they do not answer my questions or explain their policy. I'm already ashamed to be associated with such people because of what they do in the world and am therefore voting NO to further integration. If a constitution is ever written that we get consulted on then I'll reconsider. As it is the whole credit crunch has made me realise that the political class we have, funded as it is by corporate entities, is entirely not to be trusted and however innocuous the treaty may appear they can rewrite it on the fly without any recourse to a referendum. The humanist in me wants integration with the peoples and cultures of Europe but I wouldn't buy the Lisbon treaty on that basis.

djpbarry

O'Coonassa wrote: »

...however innocuous the treaty may appear they can rewrite it on the fly without any recourse to a referendum.

Not if said rewriting conflicts with our consitution they can't.

O'Morris

djpbarry wrote: »

Not if said rewriting conflicts with our consitution they can't.

Are you sure about that?

Hitman Actual

O'Morris wrote: »

Are you sure about that?

Yes, this is absolute, and has been done to death. Surely the onus is on you to provide, with reference to the Treaty, any evidence to the contrary?

O'Morris

Hitman Actual wrote: »

Yes, this is absolute, and has been done to death. Surely the onus is on you to provide, with reference to the Treaty, any evidence to the contrary?

I don't have any evidence to the contrary. I wasn't saying he was wrong in what he said. I was just asking him if he was sure about it. It wasn't a rhetorical question.

Hitman Actual

O'Morris wrote: »

I don't have any evidence to the contrary. I wasn't saying he was wrong in what he said. I was just asking him if he was sure about it. It wasn't a rhetorical question.

Okay, apologies for the bluntness, I thought you were challenging djpbarry on his comment (not that he needs anyone to reply for him).

Article 48 covers the amendment procedural changes given in Lisbon, and there is no provision whereby a country can be forced to accept any amendments against their will. Countries have to ratify changes in accordance with their constitutional requirements, and if a change doesn't require a referendum through Crotty, normal Dail procedures apply. But more importantly, EU Treaties follow the International Law of Treaties, so changes must be ratified by all participating states (something to do with the free consent principle of multi-lateral Treaties). This is the reason why Lisbon can't be ratified without all member states consent; it's nothing to do with EU 'rules', as gets thrown around here often.

Hitman Actual

O'Coonassa wrote: »

If a constitution is ever written that we get consulted on then I'll reconsider.

You want to be consulted on the contents of an International Treaty? Are you qualified? And you do realise that Ireland has participated in the drafting of every Treaty since we joined?

O'Coonassa wrote: »

however innocuous the treaty may appear they can rewrite it on the fly without any recourse to a referendum.

Read Article 48, page 57, and show us where this can happen. The fact is, it can't. You have been misled on this point, and I'm sure on many others if you believe that one.

O'Coonassa

Hitman Actual wrote: »

You want to be consulted on the contents of an International Treaty? Are you qualified? And you do realise that Ireland has participated in the drafting of every Treaty since we joined?



Read Article 48, page 57, and show us where this can happen. The fact is, it can't. You have been misled on this point, and I'm sure on many others if you believe that one.

You're picking on an issue that is of little relevance to me and although I think you're misled I have no wish to argue the point. There are other issues of more importance inducing me to vote no, mistrust of the manipulative nature of the political elite is just one of them.

As for "am I qualified" to be consulted on a treaty that directly effects my future and that of my line well I don't see how you think I could possibly not be qualified. Democracy you see, that's how it works, it's a Greek word or so I'm told, meaning the rule of the People. In a corporatist oligarchy on the other hand the People would not be consulted.

Ireland has not been involved in the drafting of the treaty, if it had you would know lots of people whose opinion had been canvassed as to what the content should be. There would have been public debate on the provisions to be made. Nor was any any other European nation consulted on the matter. That is why if it was put to vote in most other places the People there would also say no.

I feel as a democrat that even if I agreed with the treaty I still have a duty to those people to vote no because in their not being asked democracy itself is being thwarted.

BlitzKrieg

I could possibly not be qualified. Democracy you see, that's how it works, it's a Greek word or so I'm told, meaning the rule of the People.

representative Democracy

Scofflaw

O'Coonassa wrote: »

You're picking on an issue that is of little relevance to me and although I think you're misled I have no wish to argue the point. There are other issues of more importance inducing me to vote no, mistrust of the manipulative nature of the political elite is just one of them.

As for "am I qualified" to be consulted on a treaty that directly effects my future and that of my line well I don't see how you think I could possibly not be qualified. Democracy you see, that's how it works, it's a Greek word or so I'm told, meaning the rule of the People. In a corporatist oligarchy on the other hand the People would not be consulted.

Ireland has not been involved in the drafting of the treaty, if it had you would know lots of people whose opinion had been canvassed as to what the content should be. There would have been public debate on the provisions to be made. Nor was any any other European nation consulted on the matter. That is why if it was put to vote in most other places the People there would also say no.

I feel as a democrat that even if I agreed with the treaty I still have a duty to those people to vote no because in their not being asked democracy itself is being thwarted.

The EU holds consultations on an ongoing basis, and there were extensive consultations for the Constitution, starting back in 2002. Unfortunately, just like surveys, it's impossible for a consultation to involve absolutely everybody. Consultation will involve a number of 'representative' groups and individuals, and not all of us will consider ourselves represented, particularly if we have no idea what was said during the consultations. However, organisations like the Forum on Europe regularly facilitate such consultations, and report on the results.

It's an imperfect system, but most complaints about it are the result of waiting for the EU to come to us, rather than going to them.

cordially,
Scofflaw

djpbarry

O'Coonassa wrote: »

You're picking on an issue that is of little relevance to me and although I think you're misled I have no wish to argue the point.

That's a cop-out. If you're not prepared to argue a point then why make the point in the first place?

O'Coonassa wrote: »

There are other issues of more importance inducing me to vote no, mistrust of the manipulative nature of the political elite is just one of them.

How about a few reasons based on the content of the treaty?

O'Coonassa wrote: »

Ireland has not been involved in the drafting of the treaty, if it had you would know lots of people whose opinion had been canvassed as to what the content should be.

Ah, you mean the way I know lots of people whose opinion was sought prior to the drafting of the latest budget? Oh no, wait; I don't.

O'Coonassa wrote: »

There would have been public debate on the provisions to be made.

I find this extremely unlikely given how little most people seem to know about EU institutions.

O'Coonassa wrote: »

Nor was any any other European nation consulted on the matter.

So Ireland wasn't consulted in the drafting of the treaty and neither was any other European nation? So the treaty just materialised out of thin air, did it?

O'Coonassa wrote: »

That is why if it was put to vote in most other places the People there would also say no.

You think the EU should not do anything without the express consent of the population? In that case, what’s the point in electing representatives?

O'Coonassa wrote: »

I feel as a democrat that even if I agreed with the treaty I still have a duty to those people to vote no because in their not being asked democracy itself is being thwarted.

You mean you will continue to vote 'No' until the treaty is ratified according to your wishes? That's not terribly democratic, is it?

O'Coonassa

Scofflaw wrote: »

It's an imperfect system, but most complaints about it are the result of waiting for the EU to come to us, rather than going to them.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Like I say in my initial post I've written to them on their website and written to MEP's directly and had no joy with them. On those few occasions where they did deign to answer my queries they were met with fudge. I have met nobody who was consulted on the treaty but I have met people who have been consulted in various marketing surveys and indeed have been a participant myself. I know that's not a very scientific way of judging the consultation process but it's all I have at my disposal.

I was in Swaziland at the time they were drafting and implementing their new constitution. Swaziland is an absolute monarchy and about as anti-democratic a place as you can get. Still there was more evidence of consultation and more public debate generated in this one small country than I have seen evidence of here.

Hitman Actual

O'Coonassa wrote: »

You're picking on an issue that is of little relevance to me and although I think you're misled I have no wish to argue the point.

Okay, I'll tell you what- You show me exactly where in the Treaty there can be future amendments without consent of all member states, and I'll show you why there can't be. We'll see whose argument holds up better to scrutiny. I've even given you the article to look through to make it easier for you. Do you accept that challenge?

As for the rest of the post, other's have covered it better than I can, but, here, knock yourself out.