From: skutvik@online.no
Date: Fri Jun 10 2005 - 16:37:36 BST
Wim, Platt, Ian and MD.
I'd like to drop a line on the EU issue. Norway is not a member
and will have no say in constitutional matters, still our "no"
phalanx rejoiced the results as if it was a vote over EU as such,
but that was hopefully not the case, the Be-Ne-Lux countries
were the founders. Nor do I believe that the Dutch really oppose
a closer knit EU, even something resembling an USE, but the
prospects of more poor members from the former Soviet block
plus Muslim Turkey may have turned the scale.
Poland with its big agriculture sector already require big subsidies
and the farmers from the old EU have already begun to receive
less. Also the "invasion" of cheap labor from the said Eastern
states that press wages and makes local companies go bankrupt .
This we (as member of the economic co-operation) aren't exempt
from and it's here I find the left-wing rhetoric false. They pretend
to protest capitalism, globalization and bureaucracy, but it is
really good old selfishness.
One columnist managed to invoke the French Revolution after
the French NON, saying that it, in its time, was a revolt against
capitalism ..etc. but if anything it wasn't that, rather the old
feudal system being replaced by what later would allow
"capitalism" to develop (the term itself is Marx' from a century
later)
Wim's of 3. June.
> Wouldn't the MoQ say that 4th level patterns of value are supposed
> to go off on purposes of their own rather than to go on supporting
> 3rd level patterns of value? Meaning that they try by definition to
> free themselves from 3rd level patterns of value as soon as they are
> not dependent on them any more. So to the extent that free movement
> of people is possible without threatening the 3rd level basis of 4th
> level patterns of value, it should be supported. We once discussed
> before that with modern technology social security systems can be
> devised (and in the Netherlands increasingly work in a way) that
> doesn't burden them with recent immigrants.
It's hard to sort out the MOQ level application but .. well.
> They don't have rights to social security and the system is
> able to discriminate between new immigrants and others. The fact
> that people project fears resulting from a stagnating economy on
> immigrants (i.e. make immigrants into a scapegoat) doesn't seem a
> valid reason to me to support immigration control.
Are these immigrants from the third World or from within the EU?
If they are of the first category and EU is promoting immigration
control is that bad? Europe can't receive all Africa.
> It IS a reason to better educate these
> people. A lot of analyses of the referdum outcome in the Netherlands
> point out that the 'yes'/'no'-division was to a large extent along
> 'educated'/'relatively uneducated' lines... The towns where 'yes'
> won are without exception towns with a large cosmopolitan,
> well-to-do, highly educated, elite part of the population.
It looks from the above that the uneducated immigrants are the
no voters but that sounds most strange.
Bo
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Jun 10 2005 - 17:50:49 BST