|
Post by robeiae on Dec 5, 2016 9:06:27 GMT -5
So, Italy had a referendum on whether or not to amend its constitution (to essentially reduce the power of its legislature's upper house). The referendum was pushed by Renzi, with the goal being--supposedly--making it easier to govern and to stimulate the Italian economy. The referendum went down in flames and Renzi is now following suit: What does it mean? Well, many think it opens the door for Italy's exit from the EU (Ixit?). Flings it wide open, actually. And it reflects a growing populist sentiment throughout Europe, though the elections in Austria seem to suggest otherwise. Thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Dec 5, 2016 14:28:49 GMT -5
Don't know enough about Italian politics, but it does seem to me like a lot of countries are itching to leave the EU and eying one another as they sidle towards the door...
|
|
|
Post by celawson on Dec 6, 2016 1:21:19 GMT -5
Yes, there is definitely a growing populist movement in some countries in Europe, and we've certainly just had our own here. It will be interesting to see if this Italian referendum does lead to Quitaly.
But I think the thread that ties this populist movement together among most of the countries we are seeing it in, is that the Left side of the political spectrum is taking the hit. And that's pretty instructive. Economic struggles and the huge waves of immigration have made people revolt against the ideas and policies which have put them where they are right now. And why not? If something isn't working, then we must try something else, no? But Austria's vote was against the far right, so maybe it's just that people want a more centrist approach? And the populist movement is trying to bring things back to the center though may be over correcting at first?
The EU might be something that had a purpose at the time, but wow was it ambitious to put distinct countries with such unique histories and cultures and ways of doing things under one roof and with one currency. And of course, as these struggles became apparent, the EU had to grow more and more bloated to try to keep things under control. And resentment grows. Who knows if the EU will survive this wave.
|
|
|
Post by Don on Dec 6, 2016 6:01:24 GMT -5
Decentralization is the wave of the future. The EU is simply the newest of the mega-states, the most disjointed and flimsy, and therefore the first that will collapse as people walk away. While society offers people more and more choices, more granularity and more diversity, the political class wants more and more centralization. While society becomes more and more complex, the political class continues to think they can "manage" 21st century society with what is still essentially an 18th century approach. Early 18th - the era of kings. The Internet of ideas gave people lots of ways to work around the political roadblocks in the road to progress. The Internet of Things is going to simply accelerate that trend.
While there are still noisy minorities on both sides, the participation trends (both in parties and in elections) points the way toward the future.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 6, 2016 9:19:45 GMT -5
Russia will be only too glad to chomp down some of the little countries freed from the tyranny of the EU.
Putin must be delighted -- not only did his pet candidate win our election, but instead of a large and powerful union of member states in Europe, there'll be a whole bunch of smaller countries squabbling with one another.
ETA:
New York and California aren't culturally much like the midwest, and clearly they're on a way different wavelength politically. Maybe they should split off. Texas, too -- they've been talking about it long enough. All three could manage on their own. Some states are overwhelmingly pro choice. Some are overwhelmingly pro life. I mean, why have the tyranny of a federal government and other states with competing interests ramming stuff down one another's throats?
(Once upon a time, wasn't there some considerable question about whether some very different colonies with very different interests could form a union? Some owned slaves, some didn't, some were more urban, some more rural... )
I see benefits in the EU. If some member states want to split off, fine, but my guess is it won't necessarily be all gas and gaiters.
ETA:
But yeah, it seems to be a trend for EU countries to eye the door lately. I guess we'll see.
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Dec 6, 2016 9:36:49 GMT -5
Putin must be delighted -- not only did his pet candidate win our election... This is neither here nor there, but imo the day is going to come--in the not so distant future--when Putin and everyone else realize that Trump isn't in anyone's pocket. I'm not saying this as praise of Trump, at all. So don't misunderstand me. But nonetheless, I think Putin and many others are mistaken if they think Trump can be led around by the nose. He's going to do his own thing. Of course, that "own thing" may be a stupid thing, or it may be doing nothing, whatsoever.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 6, 2016 9:44:54 GMT -5
Putin must be delighted -- not only did his pet candidate win our election... This is neither here nor there, but imo the day is going to come--in the not so distant future--when Putin and everyone else realize that Trump isn't in anyone's pocket. I'm not saying this as praise of Trump, at all. So don't misunderstand me. But nonetheless, I think Putin and many others are mistaken if they think Trump can be led around by the nose. He's going to do his own thing. Of course, that "own thing" may be a stupid thing, or it may be doing nothing, whatsoever. Actually, I agree -- I absolutely do not think Trump is in Putin's pocket, and panting to do whatever he says. I'm not sure Putin thinks so either. What I do think is that Trump is likely to damage some of our interests and alliances, and exacerbate some of our frictions, with his bluster and rashness. And that Putin will take advantage of that. Let's all hope I'm wrong.
|
|