Be Afraid
From the desk of The Brussels Journal on Mon, 2006-12-25 09:24
A quote from Andrew Cusack on his blog, 24 December 2006
What Belien actually gives us is an overview of the history of “Belgium” which is both succinct and thorough, mostly focusing on the Belgian monarchy and its deep influence on the formation of this “nation” half-French and half-Dutch. It makes for a fascinating read of disgrace and debauchery as we’re told of the disgusting actions of, firstly the various kings of Belgium from the creation of the country ex nihilo in 1830, and then of astonishing Belgian cowardice and collaboration in the First and Second World Wars. However all this pales in comparison to the most telling, and the most disturbing, part of the book which tells us about modern, post-war Belgium. I will not reveal it’s contents but is truly, truly frightening. The point Belien posits as the crux of the book is this: I’ve told you about Belgium. Recall that the Eurocrats and their enthusiasts extol Belgium as the model for European unity; a single state in which communities of different blood and language live together in supposed harmony. If what I’ve written is true, then be afraid: be very afraid. And you will be.
@ Kapitein Andre
Submitted by George2 on Thu, 2006-12-28 00:42.
What I mean is: if you ask the Austrians, the people from Luxemburg and Liechtenstein if they feel like belonging to Germany, they will answer no. The same will be true for the Flemish belonging to the Netherlands.
There is a Dutch professor (Geert Hofstede) who did quantitative research on national cultures. One of the many things he found is that there no neighboring cultures in Europe that differ more than the Dutch and Flemish cultures do.
I agree with you that Belgium is not a real nation-state. Flanders is. I also agree that the referendum is a powerful tool for direct democracy.
To George2:
Submitted by Kapitein Andre on Tue, 2006-12-26 01:52.
Swiss democracy is a fusion of representative and direct democracy, embodied in the executive council, referenda, and proportional representation.
To: Kapitein Andre
Submitted by westernfox on Tue, 2006-12-26 02:56.
I think George2's point was that there is very little direct democracy in the EU, and, as such, your comparison of the EU* to Switzerland is rather poor.
*You refer to "a model of European unity," which George2 took to refer to the European Union, which is a logical assumption in the context of the conversation.
re: the wrong model
Submitted by George2 on Mon, 2006-12-25 23:35.
"It employs direct democracy wherever possible"
@ Kapitein Andre
I think if you would apply direct democracy, you will find that your last sentence is wrong.
The wrong model...
Submitted by Kapitein Andre on Mon, 2006-12-25 22:45.
The Confederatio Helvetica, otherwise known as Switzerland, is more of a model for European unity:
It is governed by a council
It employs direct democracy wherever possible
Its member cantons retain control over such important areas as immigration
Economic and military integration do not necessarily mean socio-cultural
Belgium, like Luxembourg and Liechtenstein is not a real nation-state; it is based upon geopolitical realities rather than national popular sovereignty. Belgium, like the other examples is a feudal remnant from the Carolingian Middle Kingdom of Lothar, that vast swath of borderland between Gallo-Roman, Germanic, and Italic culture.
Flanders belongs to the Netherlands, just as Luxembourg, Leichtenstein, and Austria do to Germany.