Make Inishturk Great Again
-
I'm all with you with the symbolic meaning of the EU. Unfortunately, I'm convinced that we cannot change its nature as is. It's too complicated, there are too many barriers.
We can't go back on the treaties, as unanimity is required. All 28 countries have to agree. It's rather easy for the politicians in charge to get new treaties signed, as they are all pretty much on the same page : free market, less social laws, making it easier for multinational corporations, less democracy, etc.
But if the people think one treaty was a mistake, good luck to change that. Our only option is to get out, we can't change the EU from the inside. Not to mention the laws decided by the commission which have to be applied in the countries within a few months/years delay.
Sure, it was advertised with nice ideas and symbols to get people on board, but it was not designed with the people in mind. And surely it was not designed for the people to be able to change it.
The EU is so undemocratic that if it was a country, it could not be accepted in the EU...For me, the EU as it is today is a neoliberal trap (look how Syriza was crushed) from which we should get out asap. This doesn't mean war, this doesn't mean people can't move, this doesn't mean we'll stop trading, this doesn't mean we can't rebuild it better with the people in mind (and not finance).
Now, getting out just for the sake of getting out, without a project in mind, is probably not a good idea right now. Like Brexit which was defended only be the far-right politicians. But I do think an exit from the left is possible.
-
I agree with you on that too Jiminy, and I wish leaving EU would be an answer, but the symbolic blow will probably mean too much, specially now with so many new issues that Europe thought would be erradicated by now.
There's growing fear, growing xenophoby, growing poverty and social unbalance here and these are fundamental ingredients for the greatest calamities possible.
I'm quite certain these were some of the issues that triggered Brexit.
That's why a trade union isn't enough, we need more values that unite us and that's also why I don't look at EU's exodus as a good thing.
-
@jql said:
There's growing fear, growing xenophoby, growing poverty and social unbalance here and these are fundamental ingredients for the greatest calamities possible.
I'm more than convinced that these are products of neoliberalism, and in Europe the EU is by far its best vector.
I'm sure that these issues would vanish by themselves over time if we lived in a more social, democratic, people-driven EU.@jql said:
That's why a trade union isn't enough, we need more values that unite us and that's also why I don't look at EU's exodus as a good thing.
That's why I think we should think about how to build a better EU even before leaving the current one.
-
Our government tried to make the eu change its wasteful ways and become more democratic, less beurocratic and wasteful for years without a single sign of change. The only way the eu will change is if the french and germans (they see themselves as the senior partners with greater say) can be frightened into it. The only reason they were so against brexit was that they saw our money as a way to help attain their goals. Those two nation have more or less togethter destroyed what the eu was supposed to be about, democratic improvement. Take a look at the demonstrations in Germany and france against the way their leaders are bringing more and more poorer people into their nations to bring chaos into the health, housing and financial institutions. The only way to deal with the migrant problem is to make their home nations safer for them. Enable them to live safely in their own homes. Bringing them to Europe, where they have no family et will only make for more far right idiots to feel justified in their actions, costing more innocent lives.
-
They're so sweet...
Interviewer: "If the Americans did move here what would you say?"...
Irish local: "I'd welcome them with open arms of course."
-
@mike lucey said:
(...)I would vote for Trump simply because he is a deal maker more than a war monger.
How would we know that? He's not held any office so far.
We do know, however, 'the Donald' has a strained relationship with the truth, doesn't shy away from racism and misoginy, and holds peculiar views on such staples of democracy like the freedom of press.
Clinton is by no means a saint -but that doesn't change the fact that Trump, quite frankly, is a complete fruitcake, who holds a worldview not unlike that of an egotistical ten-year-old.
-
@stinkie said:
@mike lucey said:
(...)I would vote for Trump simply because he is a deal maker more than a war monger.
How would we know that? He's not held any office so far.
We do know, however, 'the Donald' has a strained relationship with the truth, doesn't shy away from racism and misoginy, and holds peculiar views on such staples of democracy like the freedom of press.
Clinton is by no means a saint -but that doesn't change the fact that Trump, quite frankly, is a complete fruitcake, who holds a worldview not unlike that of an egotistical ten-year-old.
Not mentioning his hair. Nothing pouring from that mind is right, not even his hair!
-
I really hope in the voting box people see past their reluctance for Hillary and see she has a ton of experience for the job where the other candidate totally has not. We don't need another cowboy in charge of a super power.
-
@stinkie said:
@mike lucey said:
(...)I would vote for Trump simply because he is a deal maker more than a war monger.
How would we know that? He's not held any office so far.
We do know, however, 'the Donald' has a strained relationship with the truth, doesn't shy away from racism and misoginy, and holds peculiar views on such staples of democracy like the freedom of press.
Clinton is by no means a saint -but that doesn't change the fact that Trump, quite frankly, is a complete fruitcake, who holds a worldview not unlike that of an egotistical ten-year-old.
I don't know that he is not a potential war monger but I was impressed with his statements about his willingness to talk to the various opposition heads of state around the World.
I pity USA voters if the choice will be between Trump or Clinton. Then again they have not had much choice in quite a while. I think I would have to go back to JFK and he only scraped in also his policies were not tolerated by 'the powers that be'.
Its much the same the world over. It seems to me that 'the powers that be' decide what the electorates choice will be from and they don't really care which candidate is elected as they will either control them or eliminate them.
Personally I'm for more Direct Democracy https://www.google.co.nz/search?client=opera%26amp;q=Direct+Democracy%26amp;sourceid=opera%26amp;ie=UTF-8%26amp;oe=UTF-8 which frightens the crap out of 'the powers that be'. With it they loose control and this is their aim at any cost even their own ultimate demise.
With today's instant communication methods I see no reason for us to give the reins of a country to anyone for 5 years to do as they wish.
-
@kaas said:
I really hope in the voting box people see past their reluctance for Hillary and see she has a ton of experience for the job where the other candidate totally has not. We don't need another cowboy in charge of a super power.
Like I said, I pity the USA electorate's choice between what appears to be a proven liar (knowingly or not) or a so called 'cowboy'. At least with the 'cowboy' they would know that he may not be fully 'bought and paid for'. Yes, its a case of 'the devil and the deep blue sea' I'm afraid.
-
-
-
I highly recommend listening to Chris Hedges: The Algebra of Revolution http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/07/15/chris-hedges-the-algebra-of-revolution/
Its eye opening, thought provoking and even anger producing to say the least.
-
@mike lucey said:
I don't know that he is not a potential war monger but I was impressed with his statements about his willingness to talk to the various opposition heads of state around the World.
Well ... That's the least one could expect, isn't it?
I'd not vote for that man with a gun held to my head. He reminds me of Mussolini: a narcissistic blowhard with a rather unhealthy thirst for confirmation and power.
I sincerely hope Trump does not get elected.
-
@stinkie said:
@mike lucey said:
I don't know that he is not a potential war monger but I was impressed with his statements about his willingness to talk to the various opposition heads of state around the World.
Well ... That's the least one could expect, isn't it?
I'd not vote for that man with a gun held to my head. He reminds me of Mussolini: a narcissistic blowhard with a rather unhealthy thirst for confirmation and power.
I sincerely hope Trump does not get elected.
Yes, I agree a US President talking to the opposition before attacking is the least US citizens would hope for but I have my doubts this will be the case if Trump doesn't get elected.
The World has had a taste of what to expect in this case and I for one don't what to see more bloodshed and countries destroyed around the World.
Hopefully USA voters will be able to overlook Trump's trashy flashiness and realise that fundamentally he has some potential to do as he says, "Make America Great Again", which in turn will also help World affairs and promote peace and prosperity.
-
@mike lucey said:
Hopefully USA voters will be able to overlook Trump's trashy flashiness and realise that fundamentally he has some potential to do as he says, "Make America Great Again"(...)
You'll have to explain that one, Mike. I don't, er, 'see it'.
-
-
@stinkie said:
@mike lucey said:
Hopefully USA voters will be able to overlook Trump's trashy flashiness and realise that fundamentally he has some potential to do as he says, "Make America Great Again"(...)
You'll have to explain that one, Mike. I don't, er, 'see it'.
They say folks should be judged by what they do rather than what they say. Trump, whether you like him or not is an achiever and gets the job done one way or the other. I don't think he is terribly interested in money at this stage so there might be a chance that BIG business, Bankers and Wall Street won't he able to control his policies too much.
I notice that he is keeping his mouth zipped more these days as he realises that he has a good shot at the Presidency. I also notice that both presidential running mates are of Irish ancestry. Mike Pence's maternal grandmother's parents were from Doonbeg, County Clare, 30 miles down the road from me.
-
@mike lucey said:
They say folks should be judged by what they do rather than what they say.
That's not how elections work. People are judged by two things:
- What they say;
- If people believe what they say.
Only if someone is running up for a second time, can he be judged by what he did.
What Trump proved up until now, at least to the rest of the world, it's that he is a rather narrowminded man. That was useful for him as a business man, but someone ruling a country having a narrow view of things can only lead to a narrow way of ruling...
-
@mike lucey said:
They say folks should be judged by what they do rather than what they say.
All right.
Trump said he'd 'protect' the LGBT community. What he did, however, was choose a running mate who's staunchly against same-sex marriage and civil union.
I'd not share a taxi with someone like that, let alone make him my veep.
@mike lucey said:
Trump, whether you like him or not is an achiever and gets the job done one way or the other.
Trump went bankrupt four times. Despite the considerable head start.
Advertisement