Political Theory

Re: European Union...

ozzy43 — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 16:20:29 GMT

Stranger:
I've seen what happens to people who shoot cops.

So have I - and that's one of the best reasons I can think of to divest power from the State and back to the people. Do you think it's just happenstance that shooting a cop leads to intense media attention and the dedication of a massive amount of State resources to tracking down the killer(s) while the shooting of just some plain old unimportant citizen is lucky to get reported on page B18?

Re: European Union...

ozzy43 — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 16:17:55 GMT

Stranger:
DBratton:
Stranger:
Subsidiarity is garbage. I'm more worried about my neighbor having power over me instead of some far-off bureaucrat who doesn't know I exist.

Not me. I can shoot my neighbor.

I've seen what happens to people who shoot cops.

OK, so the logic you seem to be working with there is: subsidiarity, under your definition, means all your neighbors have power over you - AND now also, all your neighbors are cops, and all their neighbors are cops, too, presumably. In other words, everyone is a cop. This scenario has zero to do with the concept of subsidiarity (by the standard definition), and I really have no idea where you are coming up with what seems to be a fantasy.

So we are to believe that it's preferrable to have a gargantuan, unaccountable monolithic State which, through its multitudinous agents at EU/nation/state/city level, asserts control over its citizens' actions (and thoughts were possible), while permitting them a few so-called 'freedoms', than to have power devolved to the individuals comprising society. So let me ask you once again: what are you doing posting on these forums, where the prevalent view is precisely the opposite?

Re: European Union...

Stranger — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 15:55:22 GMT

DBratton:
Stranger:
Subsidiarity is garbage. I'm more worried about my neighbor having power over me instead of some far-off bureaucrat who doesn't know I exist.

Not me. I can shoot my neighbor.

I've seen what happens to people who shoot cops.

Re: European Union...

Rhotair — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 14:35:08 GMT

DBratton:
Stranger:
Subsidiarity is garbage. I'm more worried about my neighbor having power over me instead of some far-off bureaucrat who doesn't know I exist.

Not me. I can shoot my neighbor.

Unless the collective decides to take your guns away.

Re: European Union...

DBratton — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 19:21:51 GMT

Stranger:
Subsidiarity is garbage. I'm more worried about my neighbor having power over me instead of some far-off bureaucrat who doesn't know I exist.

Not me. I can shoot my neighbor.

Re: European Union...

Rhotair — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 16:54:33 GMT

Your basic mistake is to think that the EU has anything to do with free trade - to the contrary, it's all about CONTROL.

A minor mistake is to try to associate politics with reason.

Re: European Union...

Liberty Dave — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 16:34:33 GMT

"...how do you overcome the (very likely) possibility that other countries behave in incredibly protectionist ways, making trade highly difficult?"

I would pose this question as a partial answer to your question: If a country behaves in a negative fashion in regards to trade, wouldn't they be punished in a peaceful way by other countries refusing to trade with them (or reducing it by a certain amount)?

Let's take a simple example. Bill, Lucy, John, and Wendy all have fruit to trade with each other. Bill, Lucy and John are very friendly to trade with, and have basically no conditions on trading with one another. Wendy, however, will only trade with you if you buy X amount of fruit from her in return, and you must pay a premium price for her fruit and fill out a form before you trade with her. Bill, Lucy and John will therefore not trade with Wendy, or if Wendy has some unique fruit that none of them are able to obtain they may trade with her "on occasion", but limit it to only special occasions. Wendy will then not receive as much trade as she would if she reduced her restrictions, correct? And this, of course, would affect the amount of profit she could receive.

I know it's a simple example but I think it gets the point across. I'm still learning a lot about Austrian economics, so my example may leave a lot to be desired.

Re: European Union...

Inquisitor — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 14:43:27 GMT

It should be noted that the proposed Constitution made provisions for countries who want to 'exit' the EU. Whether the EU will stand for it is another matter entirely, but something to remember is that as an institution it is still pretty much toothless, in spite of its heavy meddling in national affairs.

Re: European Union...

Kakugo — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 10:08:55 GMT

Anonymous Coward:
To change the subject a bit, I just wonder how long before the EU claims 'ownership' of the member states so any attempt to secede will result in a Civil War. Seems to be inevitable, the slow transfer from the European Union to the European Union.

If I remember correctly Iceland, Greenland and Norway left the EEC, back in the days when it was called this way, over fishing quotas disputes.

In recent year only very few people talked about leaving the EU: it has become such a sacred cow that nobody can talk ill of it. Some people even believe that the EU is only hope against the "evil" national and local governments, not understanding that they are one and the same thing.

I am personally curious to see how the Belgian crisis will end. For years the EU as adopted a strict two-way policy over secession. If the country doesn't belong to the EU "secession is a right as recognized by the Helsinki Treaty", if the country belongs to the EU separatists are to be treated as "lone nuts", "ignorant of our rich heritage" or even worse. Take Kosovo for example: the EU (backed by the US, of course) is strongly supporting the Albanian separatists. Billions of Euros are ready to "help jumpstart the economy" and NATO troops are already in place, ready to defend the new country. Now take Brittany, Corsica, Lombardy or Euskadi: the separatists there are demonized by the mainstream press even if, like the Lombards, have always been very peaceful and law abiding to the extreme or if, like the Bretons, have abandoned their armed struggle many years ago. The EU and the national governments need each other to survive and freedom (in any form) is their poison.

Re: European Union...

newson — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 07:42:54 GMT

sam72:
On the other hand, people, goods, and capital are able to easily move around the entire union.

hmmm, i think you'll find it's a lot less than this in practice. think of the campaign the french mounted to defend themselves from that evil bogeyman - the polish plumber (and the polish counteroffensive). professions, trades etc are still subject to local rules, stifling cross-border competition. look at the nationalism in the electricity sector, or virtually any "core" industry, and it's clear the integration is much less than was hoped for. likewise, writing a cheque in euros on an italian bank and presenting it in france incurs high transaction costs (comparable to pre-union rates).

talk about "big brother" - in the case of italy, brussels was issuing edicts that threatened the wood-fired neapolitan pizza (health ruling about oven temperature), "colonnata" lard (a regional delicacy where lard is cured in marble - brussels knows better than centuries of gourmands), and wooden cutting blocks. this is just the tip of a very big iceberg.

on the positive side, brussels has earned a deservedly bad name for itself, and will be blamed by wily nationalist politicians for any imaginable problem.

anyway, how can any monetary union function when the constituent countries have vastly different economic structures? germans still have a soft spot for a hard currency, when the italians have always gone for the quick-fix of devaluation. look at the flack the ecb has been copping from sarkozy.

i think the union was flawed in conception, always destined for failure,and has its real baptism of fire ahead of it - major economic crisis. the eu's enemies are already thick on the ground.

sad to say, there is no plan b, which means the eventual collapse will be untidy in the extreme.

Re: European Union...

ozzy43 — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 01:43:14 GMT

Anonymous Coward:
Like NAFTA, the US, Canada and Mexico could have just agreed to open the borders over coffee instead of making some big new treaty that may of may not accomplish this goal. Hell, the US could just pull off all the border guards and create a de facto free trade zone within N. America.

Precisely correct AC - any time the government puts out a press release saying that govt officials signed some sort of treaty to allow 'free' something or other, you can bet your last dollar that 'freedom' had nothing to do with it.

Anonymous Coward:
To change the subject a bit, I just wonder how long before the EU claims 'ownership' of the member states so any attempt to secede will result in a Civil War. Seems to be inevitable, the slow transfer from the European Union to the European Union.

Terrific and thought provoking question - with any luck, we'll see it answered in the next decade or two...

Re: European Union...

ozzy43 — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 01:39:47 GMT

Stranger:
I am afraid if my neighbor is an agent of the state, which is what subsidiarity implies.

We're using the same term and defining it differently. Subsidiarity as I am using it - as the definition I posted makes clear - is all about decentralizing power from a higher level to a lower level. So, IFF you think 'govt should do X' - then subsidiarity says your next question should be: 'what is the most local level of govt that can do X effectively and efficiently?

It has nothing to do with your neighbor being an agent of the State.

Re: European Union...

Inquisitor — Tue, 18 Dec 2007 23:44:33 GMT

The UKIP has some nice videos on the EU and its democratic ways:

The clip the EU doesn't want you to see

Reach out and touch

Re: European Union...

Stranger — Tue, 18 Dec 2007 23:41:56 GMT

ozzy43:
I gotta say - if you are more afraid of your neighbor than of agents of the State, I don't know what you are doing here. You got it exactly backwards in my view. I suggest you pick up a copy of Vin Suprynowicz' The Ballad of Carl Drega to see what 'far-off bureaucrats' are capable of.

I am afraid if my neighbor is an agent of the state, which is what subsidiarity implies.

Re: European Union...

Anonymous Coward — Tue, 18 Dec 2007 23:16:30 GMT

Grant:
I can't help but wonder if the liberalization of trade in the EU will make up for the extra government. Of course, it didn't need another layer of government just to free up trade, but it seems like the only political way to fix one government program (barriers to trade) is with more, larger programs (NAFTA, WTO, EU, etc).

They could also do the completely unheard of thing and repeal the current laws and tariffs that get in the way of free trade...

Like NAFTA, the US, Canada and Mexico could have just agreed to open the borders over coffee instead of making some big new treaty that may of may not accomplish this goal. Hell, the US could just pull off all the border guards and create a de facto free trade zone within N. America.

From what I can tell the Mexicans don't really care what you bring into their country as long as it's not a gun or car intended for a permanent stay and the US/Canada border is so full of holes the checkpoints are just a formality.

To change the subject a bit, I just wonder how long before the EU claims 'ownership' of the member states so any attempt to secede will result in a Civil War. Seems to be inevitable, the slow transfer from the European Union to the European Union.