The bones of the argument

Caution – this post uses adult material.

Lifted from the not-so-fragrant Margot blog is the following comment from Dr David Taylor:

The founders of what has now become the European Union, firmly believed that the causes of the two major wars in Europe were caused by nationalism. They further postulated that if you could find a way of curbing nationalism you would prevent war.

The method they chose, a powerful supranational organisation, rather than merely an intergovernmental series of treaties has led to the current EU and its future development into what will be a federation of nation states governed by a supranational authority. Ms Wallström believes that this is the correct way forward in Europe, and her perhaps disingenuous remarks at Terezin confirm that view. In other words supranationalism is the only way to prevent the recurrence of wars between nation states.

However, there are many people who fundamentally disagree with this view and, like myself see the end result of a supranationalistic EU not being the peace and harmony of Switzerland but the discord and potential civil wars of Yugoslavia and the USSR.

The constitution of the USA begins with the words "We the people...." and was a constitution freely entered into. Even then there was to be a bloody civil war when one group of states tried to enforce its views on another group.

In the EU we have already two examples of treaties, subject to a unanimity agreement under previous treaty obligations, being rejected by the people of a member state (Denmark and Eire) but implemented anyway after insisting that the people vote again to get the "Commission approved" answer. I have no doubts that the current constitutional treaty will be dealt with in the same arrogant manner.

The often trivialised argument between the Eurosceptics and others is not about whether the states of the EU should co-operate to their greater good. Almost everyone agrees that they should. The real debate is about the governance of such co-operation. Ms Wallström and her supporters believe in supranationalism but I want to return to intergovermentalism.

Of course, this argument uses big words, so it is not suitable for everyone. If it is too difficult to follow, there is always kiddies' korner.