Stop animal abuse, end farm subsidies

(Note: this article could do with a few more statistics. For example, I'd be interested in learning about meat prices in various countries around the world, but have been unable to find such figures. Feel free to either email statistics to me, or leave them in the comments section.)

EU Rota makes a good point in criticizing European textile protectionism. But this kind of behavior is by no means limited to the EU. The United States, for example, had a little run-in with the WTO on certain steel tariffs.
Far more important than bickering about which side of the Atlantic is worse in (not) practicing free markets are the consequences of protectionist measures. It deprives poorer countries chances of growth. And back home, especially in the Netherlands, it leads to absurd situations.
In the Netherlands, space is at a premium and thus makes farming expensive. The bio industry offers a solution for that particular conundrum. Bluntly stated, this practice consists of raising as many animals as quickly as possible in as narrow a space as farmers can get away with. Now, let me state once and for all that I don't blame Dutch farmers. I blame the collective governments of the USA and the EU member states. They are to blame for what a left-wing friend of mine recently called 'legalized animal abuse'.
I wouldn't go as far as he does. Hitting animals with sticks or raping them is still a lot worse than raising pigs in small cages. But he does have a point. The 'bio industry' has led to some truly appaling stuff, such as castrating piglets without anesthesia, cows eating food which makes them grow meat faster, but also gives them perpetual diarrhea, and last but not least, keeping animals in trucks while they are hauled across the continent for about 1,000 miles or more, so they can be butchered more cheaply in some country with low wages and a high average temperature. (Granted, those trucks will have to be airconditioned in the future. What will the governments do - increase tariffs further to make up for the price difference?)
Now, I am not against killing animals. I eat meat, we had our dog put down when he was beyond rescue, and I would do the same with any pet that had become terminally ill. (By the way, unlike contemporary myth suggests, no, the Dutch don't put down their human family members whenever they like it.)
I am, however, also for treating animals with some matter of decency. Current EU policies prevent that from happening, specifically in the Netherlands, because space is so limited here. (In Ireland, where I studied for a while, almost all meat is 'free range'.)
The worst of all this that the Dutch actually pay to make this happen. As a matter of fact, we pay double. Protectionism by definition always makes items more expensive - otherwise we wouldn't need tariffs. But the Dutch also get charged through the EU, which subsidizes agricultural policy in several countries (the Netherlands, despite being a net payer to the EU, gets some in return).
I wouldn't mind paying extra, if only I could eat my steak without having to think of some poor animal that has had gastrointestinal problems from birth, never got to see the sky, or for that matter, eat real grass.
Instead, I'm paying extra to eat a piece of meat from a cow that was miserable from the day it was born, until the day it was put down.
A solution might be to do away with all tariffs. That way, it would become more appealing to import free range meat from other countries. In fact, there might even be a (small) market for free range meat from the Netherlands.
For this to happen, however, the bio industry has to go.
Fortunately, even the Dutch government realizes this.
Unfortunately, they're even worse pussies than I am.
Politicians lack the courage to do away with farms in the Netherlands once and for all, for example by buying them up, compensating farmers appropriately and aid them to restart their business in a country where it is possible to produce at market prices.
Instead they've chosen a policy of slow asphyxiation: making up more rules every year. Naturally, farmers are furious. They feel like they are being bullied, which in fact they are. The government hopes most of them will sell their farms, which many in the end do. In order to survive, the remaining farms have to become even more efficient (i.e. more animal unfriendly) to still produce cost-effectively, despite all the rules restraining them, and while on the other hand being assisted by import tariffs. (Ironically, the European Union doesn't prohibit hauling cattle all over the planet under none too comfortable circumstances.)
If this sounds Kafkaesque, it is.
I know this is never going to happen, despite (or because) it being the right thing to do. But immediate abolition of all tariffs, followed by a generous government program buying up all farms (for a limited time frame) will in the end be cheaper for the consumer/tax payer, and it will end the bio industry.
Alternatively, I'll buy my own farm and start producing my own meat.
(I might just not be kidding. Anybody want to buy cow shares?)

18:18

permalink comment(s) (2) trackback(s) (0)

I thought we'd hit rock bottom long ago

Legislating the curvature of bananas isn't enough for the Politburo European Union. Now they're trying to outlaw Dirndl dresses.

(By the way, anyone going to the Oktoberfest? All in the name of standing up for (wo)man's God given right to wear Dirndl dresses, of course.)

(Hat tip to Michelle.)

Update 16.57: Rogier emails me that the EU has apparently already reinsured Bavarians that Dirndl dresses are here to stay. Good. Now, about the curvature of those bananas...

12:34

permalink comment(s) (0) trackback(s) (1)

Sensible guys, them Germans

Via GeenStijl.

10:13

permalink comment(s) (3) trackback(s) (0)

War between the Netherlands and Belgium

Now I understand why the government wanted us to support the EU constitution. That 500 pages long document is probably the only thing that could have kept them from regressing into atavistic behaviour such as displayed in the current row between Belgium and the Netherlands.
Mr. Karel De Gucht, the Belgian secretary of foreign affairs, yesterday was quoted in the equally Belgian newspaper 'Het Laatste Nieuws' as having said that Mr. Balkenende waged a terrible 'YES' campaign (true), that Mr. Balkenende looks like Harry Potter (wrong, and an insult to Harry Potter - just ask yourself, who do you consider 'Most likely to be invited by Michael Jackson'?), that Mr. Balkenende has no charm (very true), that Mr. Balkenende is a bourgeouis stiff (only too true), and that he would have done better when there had been a plebiscite in Belgium (completely apocryphal, especially since the 'NO' voters are even on the rise in Luxembourg, which is a very rich and very pro-EU country).
De Gucht first tried to weasel his way out of the ensuing bickering by denying he'd said anything of the kind. However, since Mr. De Gucht is equally well known for making controversial statements as well as his habit of trying to cop out afterwards, the journalist who interviewed him had been smart enough to record the conversation.
So Mr. De Gucht first apologized through the media, and when that turned out to be insufficient, he also sent a letter to the Dutch secretary of foreign affairs. The later, Mr. Ben Bot, received it earlier tonight, but still isn't satisfied and wants to have an urgent meeting with the Belgian ambassador first thing in the morning.
Meanwhile, some people in France, Germany and Italy are talking about getting out of the euro. This is rich. France and Germany bent the eurozone budget rules into a Moebius ring; Italy should never even have been admitted. (By the way: no, you're not getting out of the euro, you bunch of tossers. You'll bloody well stay in and pay us our 10 percent back first before you even get to bring up the subject again. Then you can run with your tail between your legs, because God knows there are no balls to get in the way.)
To summarize, I'm beginning to think they were right about that whole Holocaust and World War III prediction. It's what might happen if we don't send this bunch of adolescents who are supposed to be our leaders home pronto.

21:37

permalink comment(s) (1) trackback(s) (0)

Why the 'NO' vote

Christopher Caldwell of the Weekly Standard gets it right by quoting a French teacher:

1. A constitution has to be readable to permit a popular vote; this text is unreadable.
2. A constitution doesn't impose a political ideology; this text is partisan.
3. A constitution is revisable; this text is locked in . . .
4. A constitution protects people from tyranny through separation of powers; this one doesn't have real checks and balances and separation of powers.
5. A constitution is not handed down by the powerful; it is established by the people themselves, to protect them from arbitrary power, through an independent constitutional assembly elected for the purpose and disbanded afterwards; this text entrenches European institutions designed 50 years ago by the men in power.

Exactly. Dutch PBS is tirelessly endeavouring to spin the 'NO' vote as the result of Dutch xenophobia and (just a few moments ago) our alleged fear of cheap Polish labour (which was a French concern, and by the way, my bathroom really needs new tiles. Bring 'em on).

Quite ironic it takes an American journal to get it right.

< self-indulgence mode >
Good thing there's blogs.
< /self-indulgence mode >

1:50

permalink comment(s) (2) trackback(s) (0)

Behold the economical miracle of Europe

Reynolds has a depressing press roundup:

'If the E.U. was treated as a single American state, it would rank fifth from the bottom, topping only Arkansas, Montana, West Virginia and Mississippi.'

Gee, I can't imagine how this came to be.

The Dutch idea of 'privatizing' state services such as health care is forcing everyone to take part in a collective insurance policy, with income dependent premiums. In my case, from next year onwards I will be paying about 3000 euros (3600 dollars) a year just for basic health care. (Additional coverage available at extra cost.) All the money will go to the Dutch HMO's, which will create a new monopoly since there's no price competition on premiums. Instead, HMO's are supposed to compete on quality of care. As opposed to any real place, in the Netherlands this will not lead to further price hikes, but instead bring about the miracle of efficiency that only a free market can bring, even though in this case it's about as free as a sand flea in Guantanamo Bay.

All this with a so-called 'free market party' VVD secretary of Health.

In other words, fuck you, VVD, for not understanding the concept of economic liberalisation.

20:31

permalink comment(s) (6) trackback(s) (0)

I thought the 'YES' campaign was over

'Death, despair, darkness, captivity, destruction, pain and lies.'

Oh wait, it's a heavy metal festival.

(Via GeenStijl. Picture from the Royal Dutch Meteorological Institute (KNMI), depicting the current weather.)

17:36

permalink comment(s) (0) trackback(s) (0)

On the other hand

Some parties may think they're doing too well in the polls, such as the allegedly somewhat libertarian VVD. Let's listen in on VVD secretary Zalm of Finance:

'I respect the results of the plebiscite, but the people aren't always right.'

Please mom, can I have a second amendment and a hunting license? It's turkey season.

11:32

permalink comment(s) (1) trackback(s) (0)

Group think

For a country so prone to tolerance and compromise, it seems odd that such a large number of MP's held similar opinions about the EU constitution without even so much as intense internal political debate within parties. In a nation with a huge bandwidth for differing points of view, 85 percent of Parliament managed to hold on to the same one: all hail the constitution. But when 62 percent of all voters reject a proposal of such a huge magnitude - we're not talking relatively minor issues such as alternative power sources or even economic policy here - it seems obvious that there's a bit of a gap between the elected representatives and those whom they represent.

Now it's true that if new elections were held right now, the parties that supported the treaty would still hold a majority. (BTW: Thank God. I don't want either Geert Wilders or the Maoist Socialist Party running the country. And neither would I like to see Mr. Rouvoet as prime minister, however much I respect him as a person.)

But parties aren't monolithic entities. Ideas can change, even party identities can. Blair managed to reform a considerable part of his Labour Party. Why? Because he was capable of (1) selling new ideas about how to be a socially conscious democrat after the old perceptions had become obsolete in post-Thatcher Britain to (2) a party which desperately needed new legitimacy with the voters.

Sounds familiar?

The EU until now wasn't much of an issue with Dutch voters: partly because citizens could hardly affect the process anyway other than participate in elections legitimizing an immature European Parliament; partly because it was unclear to them how much Europe already affected them. About half of all Dutch laws are the result of EU directives, according to weekly Elsevier, but this usually wasn't perceived this way, other than the odd sensationalist report about how the European Commission spent the day arguing the curvature of bananas.

As a result of all this, 'Europe' wasn't a subject of note in national campaigns. Politicians are quite human (well, sometimes) in the sense that they will choose the easy way out in a social context. Why disagree with your party peers and even engage in a possibly poisonous debate if there's nothing to be gained for your own career, and everything to lose? One might by accident antagonize people who could jeopardize one's climb up the ladder, or even forfeit the chance of a cushy seat in Brussels in the end.

Whenever consensus is rewarded, group think is the inevitable result. (I'll just say 'slam dunk case' right here so you don't have to bother in the comments.)

Now it seems we may enter an era in which the advantages for MP's to agree with their fellow party members on Europe may be offset by the losses of not daring to be different. A politician which can both articulate his love for a united Europe as well as promise voters to critically monitor the road to integration for pitfalls, might be acting in the best interest of both the people and his career. After all, his party could reap electoral rewards, which wouldn't necessarily reflect bad on him. As 90 percent of humankind consists of opportunists whose most important, or even sole, skill is judging likely winners and rallying behind them, more party members would follow. (I am in a good mood today. Normally, I put the percentage at 99,9999 percent. Don't even ask about my dark moods.)

Presumably, this is one of very few reasons the Netherlands still has tax-deductible mortgage interest payments (which in my view should be abolished immediately as they drive up real estate prices, but anyway. Different debate for a different day). Voters are willing to punish parties who are even considering bringing the subject up. Even the Labour Party, whose voters don't own houses as much as those of (for example) CDA or VVD, is careful not to lead the way in the mortgage debate. Likewise, after Wednesday, only a very foolish party leader would misinterpret the Dutch citizen's willingness to be similarly assertive about 'Europe'.

Granted, this willingness is recent. But it wasn't until recently that it became impossible for the voter to ignore Europe. Only with the euro, and the subsequent price hikes in the Netherlands, did this change. It didn't help much that Greece got into the EMU by cooking the books, and how France and Germany got away with flouting Eurozone budget rules.

The combination of the referendum (finally feeling direct control over a process which seemed until recently to be ungraspable) with these political and economical realities have given 'Europe' a sense of importance to the voter. Political parties would be wise to capitalize on that. They can no longer afford to ignore the citizen's wishes, for the simple reason that other parties won't make the same mistake, and instead reap gains which could have been theirs.

Elections are a marketplace of ideas. And it seems to be a buyer's market for EU stock right now. Which party will cash in on it first?

10:37

permalink comment(s) (0) trackback(s) (0)

Arrogance still rife amongst EU policy makers

Check out this press release from UNICE, a lobby organization which claims to speak for European businesses, although MKB-Nederland, the Dutch SMB organization, is not a member:

'The “no” from the Netherlands after the French one is more than a setback; it is a strong signal that the European project is badly perceived by European citizens. European policy-makers must reflect carefully on how to move forward. Deferring structural reforms is not an option but they have to be better explained and well understood.'

(Emphases mine.)

Or, in English: 'You poor ignorant voters. We understand you must feel confused. Let us explain why we know what's best for you one more time...'

Perception is not the problem. Policy is.

11:12

permalink comment(s) (2) trackback(s) (0)

Off to bed now!

Because tomorrow morning, we'll be rounding up Jews and building new gas chambers!

0:10

permalink comment(s) (2) trackback(s) (0)

Results from the big cities

As the capital is about the one remaining city in the country without voting computers, Amsterdam's results will probably be last.

View the rest of the results here.

22:09

permalink comment(s) (0) trackback(s) (0)

Rouvoet rebuts Barosso

EC President Barroso made his familiar point again, about how nine countries have ratified the constitution already.

André Rouvoet of the ChristenUnie just pointed out the fallacy in this argument: only three of those countries have put the constitution to a vote. And two of them rejected it.

Two countries that are, by the way, founding members of the EU.

21:58

permalink comment(s) (1) trackback(s) (0)

Balkenende reacts

Very disappointed, positive that there was a high turnout, yadayadayadayada, RATIFICATION PROCESS SHOULD GO AHEAD IN OTHER COUNTRIES...

Jeez, this guy never learns.

I really don't like Geert Wilders, but he was right in his response: 'Balkenende is a sore loser.'

21:35

permalink comment(s) (1) trackback(s) (0)

New elections, please

If 85 percent of Parliament wants to support a constitution that 63 percent of the constituency rejects, it seems obvious that our representatives in the Second Chamber (our Lower House/House of Representatives) no longer represent us.

Never mind that any government led by someone who tied his own image to the result of this plebiscite should also step down, if only out of shame.

Update 21.19: Even Dutch PBS asked this very same question, about a second ago!

Update 21.21: Of course, considering the huge number of unions, environmental and consumer organizations that supported the constitution, it might be a good idea if they indulged in some soul searching as well. These organizations form what is known in the Netherlands as the 'societal midfield' (maatschappelijk middenveld) and are supposed to be the lobby groups of various interests in Dutch society. But rather than speaking his master's voice, they seem to have become just as detached from their members as many politicians have from the voters.

21:12

permalink comment(s) (3) trackback(s) (0)

NO: 63 percent!

A massacre. According to the first exit poll, 63 percent of the Dutch voted no, and therefore, only 37 percent voted yes. The turnout was very high at 62 percent. Never before have people turned out in such high numbers to vote in a European election. It's quite ironic that the first time they choose to do so is when they have a chance to voice their concerns.

Thanks to all of you who voted today.

20:59

permalink comment(s) (1) trackback(s) (0)

Democracy is not a spectator sport

Go vote today, if you are physically able. It's your duty. It's not much to ask compared to what is asked of American and British boys in Iraq and Afghanistan, or of aid troops in the tsunami affected ares. You don't need to wage war or get your hands dirty. There's no risk of any bodily harm.

Your country demands of you to vote. And it has every right to do so, for you are your country. Thus, you owe it to yourself, and to those with whom you share this fine nation, to show up at the ballot box (well, voting computer).

An American gentleman sent me an email yesterday night. He spoke of Dutch patriots. That made me pause for a moment. The Dutch don't like words such as patriots. World War II has made us equate the love of our nation and pride in our values with the exact opposite: the hatred of other nations and the despising of other values. Elements that characterized fascist Germany.

That's a shame. For to love the Netherlands means nothing more, and nothing less, than to love the ideas upon which this country is built. Common sense. Our love of being stubborn, and those that are. Freedom of speech, even of being offensive. It is not an endorsement of fascism, but a celebration of diversity and community amongst individuals.

Be a Dutch patriot. Go vote. No more can be asked of you, no less can be sufficient.

'The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman.'
(Thomas Paine)

9:31

permalink comment(s) (4) trackback(s) (0)

Only a few hours until I get to use this

The most powerful weapon in western societies: my voting card. Well, apart from the RPG I keep under my pillow.

There will be more plebiscites in the future, by the way. Even the Staatkundig Gereformeerde Partij, which is an ultra-orthodox Christian party that doesn't allow female membership (!) and really would like to impose a theocracy rather than have referendums, thinks it's unavoidable. Party leader Bas van der Vlies said tonight: 'Now we've asked the voters for their opinion on this subject, it will be very hard for us to deny them that right when similar issues present themselves in the future.'

Reform is already taking place.

22:26

permalink comment(s) (2) trackback(s) (0)

Edwin votes 'yes'

Like many, he's in favor of supporting a measure which will allow shops in Utrecht to be open on Sundays.

(Got you worried for a moment there, didn't I?)

20:19

permalink comment(s) (0) trackback(s) (0)

Poll: 65 percent 'no', 10 percent undecided

In two other polls, the no voters are 16 to 18 percent respectively ahead of the yes voters.

20:43

permalink comment(s) (2) trackback(s) (0)

FRANCE DOES NOT SURRENDER: 55 57 55 PERCENT 'NON'

According to preliminary figures, at least, which have just been broadcast on French television. Dutch PBS says these figures are highly reliable, and not your ordinary exit poll, since they're based on a number of sources, including French government figures.

Can't think of a better reason to open up a good bottle of St. Emilion and put on some music. I wanna be drunk when the Holocaust comes!

I've tuned my satellite receiver to France 2 and will be watching, and report back here if I deem it necessary.

Damn, haven't felt this European in a long time.

Update 22.31: Chirac gives an address. More soon. Chirac acknowledges the French have rejected the constitution, and says he'll respect the wish of the voters. He'll have to. Tomorrow, Sarkozy will be after his job. Chirac will at the very least have to sacrifice prime minister Rafarrin. No mention of that now, although Chirac does make a reference to updates on his government in the forthcoming days.

Update 22.39: 83 percent of all votes counted. It's just gotten better: 57,26 percent NON. These figures are from De Telegraaf though, which is not the most reliable newspaper in the country (though not nearly as bad as it's often made out to be).

Update 22.52: Germans have just hung a sign from the Bastille stating 'Danke France' (Thank you, France). Makes you think about that little propaganda stunt on Friday when the Bundestag, Germany's Parliament, ratified the constitution with a near-North Korean majority. Without a plebiscite of course. Can't trust them voters.

Update 22.55: Prime minister Balkenende has responded on Dutch PBS with his usual eloquence. We should vote 'yes' because we have our own responsibility. I agree with him on the responsibility part.

Update 23.09: 57,26 percent NON figure popping up all over the place, making this an undeniable victory.

Update 23.17: European Council president Jean Claude Juncker says the ratification procedure should go ahead, stating that 9 countries have already ratified the treaty. Well yes, but only one of those countries had a plebiscite: Spain. They get a lot of money from Brussels. On the other hand, one founding member of the European Union has rejected the constitution with a convincing majority of the population. The Netherlands, also one of the six founding members and the largest net contributor per capita, may (and hopefully will) do the same on Wednesday. That's the people speaking, not politicians who have their own vested interests in wanting to adopt a constitution which endows them with more power and/or career prospects. Besides, Juncker's point is moot. The constitution can't legally get into force without the consent of all 25 members.

Update 23.32: Damn, Balkenende was right. World War III just broke out.

Update 23.40: Don't want to vote 'no' because of the bandwagon effect? Then vote 'no' after watching this atrocious attempt of Balkenende to defend the constitution.

Update 30/5/05, 11.31: The official end result says 55 percent voted non. Apparently, there were quite a lot of yes votes amongst the remaining 17 percent which still needed to be counted.

22:08

permalink comment(s) (0) trackback(s) (0)

Free Palestine! Support the constitution!

I get the New York Times less and less these days.

(Via Tim Blair.)

14:35

permalink comment(s) (1) trackback(s) (0)

Dutch courage

From Dutch PBS, who have screwed up their website with loads of Flash so I can't hyperlink to the article:

'If the French vote "no" on Sunday, over 60 percent of the Dutch will vote "no" in the plebiscite on Wednesday.

On the other hand, if the French vote "yes", that number will drop.'

I love living in a country full of independently minded people.

12:39

permalink comment(s) (0) trackback(s) (0)

Prime minister gives one more reason to say 'no'

According to Jan Peter Balkenende, he'll 'look like a fool' if the Dutch say 'no' to the constitution.
Considering Balkenende is one of the most hated prime ministers we've had for decades, I'm not sure if this argument will convince anyone to say 'yes'.
(Anyway, I'm glad he chooses to use reasons which actually have some bearing on the contents of the constitution.)

9:58

permalink comment(s) (0) trackback(s) (0)

France tries reverse psychology

From the Times:

THE leader of France’s ruling party has privately admitted that Sunday’s referendum on the European constitution will result in a “no” vote, throwing Europe into turmoil.

“The thing is lost,” Nicolas Sarkozy told French ministers during an ill-tempered meeting. “It will be a little ‘no’ or a big ‘no’,” he was quoted as telling Jean-Pierre Raffarin, the Prime Minister, whom he accused of leading a feeble campaign.

Right. Like anyone's gonna fall for that. (It's far more likely that Sarkozy is, not for the first time, positioning himself for a run up the career ladder. To the point where Chirac is now, to be exact.)

(Via Instapundit.)

19:22

permalink comment(s) (0) trackback(s) (0)

Valery Giscard d'Estaing: Fuck you very much

The guy who wrote the European constitution has come up with the perfect way to handle a constituency that doesn't seem to appreciate what he's wrought. If the French say 'no' to the constitution on Sunday, he'll just have to ask them again! After all, that's what very mature kids do if their parents won't give 'em more candy. They continue whining.

Never mind that Giscard d'Estaing is directly contradicting statements by prime minister Rafarrin of France, who said yesterday there won't be second chances. Well, I guess it's only fair to expect Giscard d'Estaing to be a little overbearing. After all, we're talking about a guy who thanks himself and his chums in the preamble to the constitution:

'GRATEFUL to the members of the European Convention for having prepared the draft of this Constitution on behalf of the citizens and States of Europe.'

As reader Jay so eloquently put it a few months ago: 'Wherever he is, you know Thomas Jefferson is laughing his ass off at that part. That'd be like him writing as the first words of the Constitution "Copyright 1776 TJ Enterprises, Inc." or "All Hail us!"'

16:08

permalink comment(s) (1) trackback(s) (0)

'Holocaust or EU' ad being aired despite 'retraction'

This sick ad was produced by the VVD party to scare Dutch voters into supporting the constitution. It caused a huge uproar at the time, and the VVD promised an immediate retraction.

Well, it turns out that RTV Drenthe, a local tv station, did broadcast the commercial nevertheless. And according to GeenStijl, they will do so again on Sunday.

No bridge too high, no cess pool too deep.

Update 18.23: GeenStijl reports that at least two other local tv stations aired the commercial.

13:21

permalink comment(s) (0) trackback(s) (0)

'European democracy will be deeply strengthened by a no-vote'

Andrew Sullivan, himself a British American, thinks a 'no' vote may be right even if it's for the wrong reasons:

'It's worth celebrating what seems to be the simple refusal of most French to go along with the monolithic policy of literally every elite institution in the country. Recall: almost every mainstream party in France is in favor of the E.U. constitution; the government and the opposition agree; no mainstream newspaper is urging non - and yet the public is still telling them to go shove it. This has got to be healthy. I'm not counting out the oui forces yet; but what we are watching is a kind of democratic protest. It may have less to do with the constitution itself than with the way in which the EU has made people feel powerless over their own destinies. The E.U. will survive a no-vote. European democracy will be deeply strengthened by a no.'

The French are, of course, a very strange country in the sense that the elitist organization of their schooling system makes them the only European country with a strong class system, comparable to that which the British Empire used to have in the 19th century. Although the French implementation is much more subtle, it's nevertheless there and it is very hard to get around. I've seen acquaintances crash and burn because they were not born in the right families or did not have the proper connections to get into the 'right' schools, although they were more than qualified. I suspect France may be facing some very tumultuous years as it moves towards a more meritocratic model.

As far as the Netherlands are concerned: in the past few days I've often wondered what worries Dutch politicians most: that a majority is considering to vote 'no', or that the country is finally engaged in the most intense political debate since the assassination of Pim Fortuyn. Indeed, the one thing that seemed to annoy most politicians about Fortuyn is that they suddenly had to debate issues which a large part of the electorate had wanted to address for years, and thanks to Fortuyn, they no longer could avoid it (though Ad Melkert famously tried).

I've felt strangely hopeful for the past few weeks, as the voice of dissent gradually increased in strength, that the tide may indeed be turning, and that this is the first step towards a better way of governing, in which politicians rule on behalf of the people rather than over them from a pedestal of feigned moral superiority.

Then again, just this afternoon I was accused, not for the first time, of being an unrealistically optimistic and idealistic person, so I'm probably wrong ;).

Off to bed now, after seven consecutive nights with no more than four hour sleep each.

22:30

permalink comment(s) (2) trackback(s) (0)

Rietveld switches sides and moves to the 'no' camp

I've said it before, David Rietveld is the one remaining sane member of the Dutch Green Party (GroenLinks). Now he proves it once more. While his party supports the EU constitution, David won't:

'History shows that obstructionists have always been compensated by the EU. For years it's been the sole negotiation tactic of the French. The British "got their money back" that way, the Danes have created more room for themselves. The Netherlands are the highest contributor per capita to the EU. I don't mind paying for a good cause, but then I want to have a say in it. And I won't settle for weak compromises just because they're easy.'

Indeed.

21:19

permalink comment(s) (2) trackback(s) (0)

We have ways of making you vote 'yes'

OK, some of them are extremely childish, others are too rude for my taste, but some Photoshopped 'Vote Yes for the Constitution' parodies are actually quite funny. See more of them here.

19:57

permalink comment(s) (0) trackback(s) (0)

Why Balkenende should talk a bit more about Srebrenica

Mark Steyn is on a roll:

'So the choice for voters on the Euro-ballot is apparently: yes to the European Constitution, or yes to a new Holocaust. If there's a neither-of-the-above box, the EU's rulers are keeping quiet about it. The notion that the Continent's peoples are basically a bunch of genocidal whackoes champing at the bit for a new bloodbath is one I'm not unsympathetic to. But it's a curious rationale to pitch to one's electorate: vote for us; we're the straitjacket on your own worst instincts. Or as the cute but gloomy Omar Naber, the Slovenian Eurovision entrant, put it in his Naberly way: "Come on; tie my hands so I can drown In lies, I bleed to death in your lap."'

'And, insofar as the past 60 years in Europe have been comparatively non-bloody, that's surely due to Nato and the American military presence, both of which your average EU apparatchik would scrap in an instant without worrying about Theresienstadts looming round the corner. The nearest to a latterday Theresienstadt was Yugoslavia and that didn't exactly reflect well on the EU. Jacques Poos, foreign minister of Luxembourg and as the holder of the rotating Euro-Presidency the Union's chief negotiator with the disintegrating Yugoslavia, told the Americans to butt out and declared: "The hour of Europe has come!" The hour of Europe came and went, and a couple hundred thousand corpses later the EU was only too grateful for the Americans to butt back in again.'

Although Steyn has never been a stranger to hyperbole he has a point. The Dutch let Srebrenica happen. A cabinet fell over that, albeit years later and only a few weeks before elections were to take place anyway. Dutch soldiers, mind you, who were at the mercy of French general Bernard Janvier, who basically told the Dutch soldiers to go to hell when they requested air support. How's that for European cooperation? We told the UN we could do it, but over 7,000 Bosniak men and boys died. It's one of the few examples of Europe having acted on its own, and I can't say it helps Balkenende to make his case.

Now, I'd rather be talking about the contents of a constitution which I've opposed for years, rather than discuss past war crimes, but you'll only have to scroll downwards to see at what level our government wants to pursue the debate. Well, at your service!

(Incidentally, that the VVD dared to include Srebrenica in this sick pro-EU commercial only indicates that they should read a book every now and then. This one will do.)

19:36

permalink comment(s) (0) trackback(s) (0)

Avoid a Dutch 9/11: support the constitution!

Just heard Balkenende and sidekick Donner suggest we can't fight terrorism without the European constitution. I'm sure Dutchman Gijs de Vries, who's in charge of Europe's anti-terrorism efforts, will be real glad to hear that. Anyway, I'm not going to waste any more words on our beloved prime minister. May Hermione transmogrify him into a cruise missile we could lob at Al Qaeda; that way "Harry Potter" would at least be useful. Urgh.

19:30

permalink comment(s) (0) trackback(s) (0)

This must be a conspiracy

The PR campaign to get the Dutch to vote in favor of the European constitution is run so incredibly bad that I wonder if it's their intention to get a no vote. For example:
• Did anyone think of the symbolism of inviting a German foreign minister on Dutch PBS to threaten us with another pan-European war, keeping in mind which country started the last two, and also considering this particular minister was in league with a terrorist group (the Rote Armee Fraktion) right until the moment it started to use violence? Now I don't mind the Germans - heck, when studying in Dublin, I had a German roommate - but I'm 29. There's still a sizeable number of people there that lived through at least part of WWII, and got raised in an anti-German atmosphere. They might not take so kindly to Joschka Fischer telling them what to do.
• Neither does it seem wise to have the Belgian prime minister trying to convince us we will lose influence in the EU if we don't go along with the constitution (never mind that agreeing to this constitution will do that, not voting against it) and threaten (there seem to be very few real arguments in favor, at least, I don't hear the proponents using them) the constitution might still go along even if we vote 'no'. Yeah, antagonize the Dutch even more will help. Incidentally, the results of the interview were accessible on the news service of cell provider Vodafone before it was alleged to take place, but otherwise than that, fair Dutch people, you're not observing a carefully orchestrated propaganda campaign, and you should trust denials of your government to that effect. Verhofstadt and Fischer regularly get involved in Dutch political affairs, like when... er...
• Come to think of it, the government slogan to promote Europe is 'Europa, best belangrijk'. This translates to 'Europe, well, I guess it's kinda important' and the slogan was widely ridiculed.
• Minority (Labour) leader Wouter Bos now says he wants a second referendum if the first one doesn't provide him with the 'yes' vote he desires. It's not that they don't take their constituents seriously, mind you, it's just that they, as our shepherds, want to make sure we make the right choice - no matter how long it takes... Unless, of course, we can also have a second referendum if the result is a 'yes'.

8:34

permalink comment(s) (0) trackback(s) (0)

Do you like the Autobahn?

Enjoy it while it lasts. The EU's energy commissioner has suggested a 100 km/h speed limit for all of Europe. And here I thought Europe wanted to prevent another war with Germany.

14:33

permalink comment(s) (0) trackback(s) (0)

"Dutch PBS censors 'no' proponents"

According to Jan Marijnissen, leader of the (Maoist) Socialist Party (SP), a debate today in Buitenhof, the leading political tv show on Dutch PBS, was cancelled to promote the European constitution:

'Buitenhof has cancelled a debate in which I was to participate. They'd rather talk to Fisher, the German secretary of Foreign Affairs. You guessed it: a staunch proponent of the European constitution. (...) Next week, Buitenhof will have the prime minister as its guest.'

Gee, I wonder how he will feel about the constitution!

12:59

permalink comment(s) (0) trackback(s) (0)

Crash course in voting 'no' on the constitution

In three hyperlinks.
• The reasons of The Economist
• The reasons of Elsevier (whose editor Arendo Joustra, by the way, is a staunch pro-European)
• The reasons of this blog.

I'm not against the EU. Not even against a constitution. But I won't support this monstrosity. There's no going back if we adopt this constitution, ever. But the Dutch government can negotiate a better deal, as Denmark has in the past, if we force them to by voting 'no' in ten nights.

9:58

permalink comment(s) (13) trackback(s) (0)

European Union wants us to vote 'no'

Why else oppose measures which would lower the Dutch contribution (currently the highest per capita in Europe), and propose new measures which would increase our contribution with 1 billion?

13:50

permalink comment(s) (0) trackback(s) (0)

Vote for the EU constitution and against Zyklon B!

This is an actual commercial produced by the free-market VVD party. For those of you who until now figured I might have been exaggerating the rhetoric used to scare us into supporting the EU constitution, well, this should prove the contrary. (BTW: the VVD party has retracted this commercial on the same day it was released.)

Update 21/5/05, 0.31: An English translation can be found here.

21:37

permalink comment(s) (0) trackback(s) (0)

Thirteen nights until our 'NO' to Europe: other than this, the euro didn't screw up our wallets

Enlightening, isn't it? (Via EU Rota, reprinted with permission.)

Meanwhile, the Dutch government is digging itself in, threatening to ignore the result of the referendum if it doesn't suit them. At least, secretary Verdonk, whom I used to respect, said that. They legally can do that, since it is not a binding referendum. However, a majority of Parliament have chosen to respect the results.

This may well mean the government intends to make a final stand by challenging Parliament, and especially the parties that support it: do what the government wants, or live with the fall of the current administration.

It's sickening, really.

Update 18.27: More disconcerting figures, courtesy of EU Rota.

8:00

permalink comment(s) (4) trackback(s) (0)

Government has now officialy lost its mind

Secretary Brinkhorst, long-time member of the D66 party which is in favor of giving the referendum a place in the Dutch constitution, is...

AGAINST THE EU REFERENDUM.

'Plebiscites can be a good thing, but this one is about something the Dutch people know nothing about,' according to secretary Brinkhorst.

The definition of being ignorant in Mr. Brinkhorst's book of course is: everyone who doesn't agree with him.

You might be interested to know that Mr. Brinkhorst used to be a member of the European Parliament. I interviewed him once - he was quite arrogant self-assured already at that time. This didn't get any better when his daughter got married to a prince of the Dutch royal family. In fact, since his daughter is also part of the House of Orange, she will be queen of the Netherlands if something happens to Willem-Alexander and Maxima, the current king-and-queen-to-be (and of course, God forbid, W-A's and M's child, plus the one which is currently on the way).

Whatever happens won't matter to Mr. Brinkhorst. He already thinks he rules the place.

20:33

permalink comment(s) (0) trackback(s) (0)

Fourteen nights until our 'NO' to Europe: The Nixon of the Netherlands

Meet Mr. Gerrit Zalm, secretary of Finance. First Mr. Gerrit Zalm told Parliament back in 1999 that the guilder wouldn't be traded in for the euro at a bargain price. Then he appeared on Dutch television last week, when he denied he had ever denied this devaluation. (Fortunately, the Dutch Parliament keeps records.) Now, his department has issued a statement that he did indeed lie, but had to for the sake of the country. Not that this makes him a liar, mind you. According to said department, since it was for a good cause it wasn't really a lie.(Today's portion of bent reality perceptions are courtesy of the Kingdom of the Netherlands. Surgeon general's warning: may cause spontaneous brain haemorrhages.) And on top of all that, Mr. Zalm just gave an interview, this time denying again, like he did in 1999 (which he denies), that the guilder didn't get a good exchange rate.

Now I understand why I get all those Vicodin spam mails. You need 'em just to be able to keep up with the political news.

By virtue of logic, at least one (but probably more) of the above statements must be false.

I'll try to sort it out after my head gets a bit clearer (see the 'running for nine miles whilst not having eaten for 20 hours' part below).

If I had wanted to organize a 'vote no campaign', I couldn't have done a better job than Mr. Zalm.

19:15

permalink comment(s) (0) trackback(s) (0)

Fifteen nights until our 'NO' to Europe: too bad most of you don't understand Dutch

You'd be able to read this rant, which is in essense a parody of the scaremongering tactics employed by the Dutch government to bully us into supporting the EU constitution:

'What a 'NO' vote will mean? In fifty years they will write (a poem, AD) about the Netherlands: 'Thinking of Holland I see barbed wire fencing, guard towers, dust and ashes. Bodies are swinging upside down, slowly rocking in the winds of a nuclear winter.'

It will be because of you, ungrateful citizens! Hypocrite dogs! We as a government have been trying so hard to build a better world. We have given you a new currency which didn't increase prices at all! We have gotten you into a wonderful union with members including a barely fascist Italian (head of state, AD) !'

If anybody wants to have a go at translating it (i.e. someone who doesn't have to work for 70 hours a week), I'd be grateful.

Update 21.11: reader Bob was kind enough to do the honours. Read the full translation by clicking 'Lees verder'.

More...

18:09

permalink comment(s) (1) trackback(s) (0)

Say no to Europe: Sensible civil servant surfaces

(Try saying that ten times fast.)

There may yet be hope for this country:

'A staff member of the finance ministry asked not to be named as he admitted that he would be voting No. "There should have been a referendum on the euro, there should be a referendum on Turkish entry," he said. "I'm voting against the constitution because politicians cannot tell me why I should be voting for it."'

And since there are plenty of reasons to vote against it, the choice really shouldn't be that hard. Read the full article from today's Daily Telegraph here.

21:35

permalink comment(s) (1) trackback(s) (0)

Say no to Europe: Why this referendum is about the euro

The Dutch government is getting frightened. They've allocated an extra 3.5 million euros for pro-constitution propaganda. It's a good thing that (thanks to Europe) this hardly buys you a sandwich anymore these days. Meanwhile, they keep on repeating the same old arguments why we should vote in favour.

Because we'll get left behind in Europe. A lie - every country that ever threw a tantrum in the EU only got more perks. Think Thatcher.

Because we'll get another Auschwitz. A lie - rejecting the constitution only keeps the EU in its current state. It doesn't disolve the Union.

And because this isn't about the euro. The biggest lie of all.

True, rejecting the constitution won't bring back the guilder. But we were cheated back then. First, by allowing Greece into the Economical and Monetary Union while their economy didn't meet the criteria. Second, by diluting the guilder to 90 percent of its real value only to please Germany.

We were robbed. And you simply don't make new deals with people who've cheated you in the past without them having made amends or even having offered an apology.

In other words, saying that this referendum isn't about the euro is the same as a salesman telling you there's nothing wrong with his camper vans, while you are still paying off the garage bills for the crappy car he sold you back in 1999.

(So there's still no reason yet not to declare war on Iran.)

11:16

permalink comment(s) (1) trackback(s) (0)

Say no to Europe: declare war on Iran

Prime minister Balkenende these days takes pleasure in comparing those Dutch citizens who consider voting 'no' against the European constitution with those responsible for letting Auschwitz happen. Secretary Donner of Justice thinks we'll have World War III if the constitition doesn't come through, in which case we'll be in a world of trouble. Especially, as one rather agitated reader so kindly put it in a recent email to me after seeing my pics of Margraten Cemetery, the USA won't come to help us this time. They'll nuke our capitals instead and be done with it once and for all.

Bad American tempers aside, David Rietveld (the one sane member of the Dutch Green Party) points out what has happened to countries that didn't join the European Union, such as Iceland, Switzerland and Norway. Not a lot of war there of late. It may have to do something with the fact that they're all fairly rich countries, either by facilitating tax refugees or because they possess vast natural resources, such as oil, or in case of Iceland, lots of fish and steam. (Yes, there's a market for steam. Just ask your local sauna.)

More fishing is out of the question. The European Union already saw to that before the constitution. Besides, you can only eat so much smoked mackerel. And there's really no need for another tax haven in the same continent. So the solution is simple. The Netherlands should invade Iran and make it into a province. Plenty of oil there, and we're already accustomed to large numbers of Arab-speaking foreigners in the country. Hell, we're used to bread and buttered Dutchies who don't speak the language. The province of Friesland is filled with them. And America would be so pleased about us taking care of the little nuclear problem that has presented itself in Iran, they'd probably allow us to open up a coffeeshop (Dutch style) inside the Capitol. Maybe even sell MDMA as well. No, that's pushing it.

Yes, let's have a referendum on war with Iran instead. It's only slightly less crazy than adopting the constitution, the cost will be negligible in comparison, and there's actually some promise of long-term yields from oil revenues. Plus, we'll finally have our very own Florida, a place that is warm enough to send our senior citizens without having to worry about their arthritis. Needless to say, the first civilian flight to Teheran after the Dutch tricolor waves everywhere in Persia will be filled with exactly these kind of sclerotic and grey-haired people: all European Union staff we can round up.

9:20

permalink comment(s) (4) trackback(s) (0)

Yet another reason to say 'no' against the constitution

According to De Nederlandsche Bank, the Dutch equivalent of the Federal Reserve Bank, the guilder (our former currency) was five to ten percent undervalued when it was absorbed into the Economical and Monetary Union (EMU), the entity that has produced the euro. This article (in Dutch) states that lots of people knew, but because of political pressure from Germany (the article speaks about 'sensitivities') nobody did a thing about it. All for the greater (= European German) good.

As a result of this magnificent example of Dutch policy makers and civil servants acting for the best interests of our nation, Dutch prices have increased more than would have been necessary, and our competitive position has deteriorated. Thank you, European Union, on behalf of all those who are currently unemployed because our economy is in a slump, or are having trouble to make their salaries meet their material needs.

The other day, I paid 2,75 euros for a Diet Coke in a pub. That's 2,2 times the price it used to be, and still policy makers maintain that the euro has not made life more expensive. All of us already knew, through our daily experiences, that life had become more dear. Now, the policy makers finally start to admit the truth. At first, hesitantly, when it turned out Greece shouldn't have been admitted, but was nevertheless, diluting the value of our currency. Now it has become obvious that we didn't need the Greeks to water down the guilder. Our own monetary officials could handle the job just fine.

Worse may be to come. The EMU was 'just' about our money. The constitution is about our voting rights, our collective defense, our welfare state. Indeed, our very sovereignty is at stake here. Is there anyone out there who can seriously believe that Dutch interests won't be trumped time and time again if the European constitution were to be adopted, God forbid, and the bigger member states would get even more power in even more areas?

They have been lying to us, they have been deceiving us. They need to be stopped. Throw a spanner in the works of the EU machinery. Vote no.

6:56

permalink comment(s) (1) trackback(s) (0)

So you want some voting advice on the European constitution

Good news! There's two websites that offer advice on how to vote, and chances are that at least one of them will tell you what you want to here.

On one of them, indirectly sponsored by the Dutch government, misleading statements manipulate visitors into an advice which is almost always positive towards the constitution. So if you are mindlessly pro-European, which you would have to be if you're willing to support this monstrosity of a constitution, go to Stemwijzer.nl and have your opinion reinforced.

If on the other hand, you are not in favour of the European Union, you can go to this site, which was built by the radical anti-globalist collective EuroDusnie. Here, misleading statements manipulate visitors into an advice which is almost always negative towards the constitution.

In my case, I actually got a 'vote no' advice on the pro-European website, and the other way around, which indicates how much of a smartass I am. It's a good thing at least my cat loves me.

Incidentally, EuroDusnie is also subsidized by the Dutch government, which goes to show the grants department has gone completely bonkers. These are the same guys that regularly threw cakes into the faces of dignitaries.

(Now I agree that some of those dignitaries actually looked a lot better after the procedure, but I don't think it's the business of the government to subsidize cosmetic improvements.)

15:00

permalink comment(s) (0) trackback(s) (0)

Why I will say 'no' to the European constitution

1) This is not a constitution. A constitution is a concise document laying down the groundwork for a nation. Laws are then adopted to further clarify what is meant by the articles in the constitution. That way, the constitution can withstand the test of time because it doesn't need to be changed every other year or so, and thus provide a sense of stability. Nevertheless, the European 'constitution' is fatter than Michael Moore in a tub of lard, with over 300 pages.
2) I have a distrust against any constitution which doesn't start with 'We, the people' or something to that end. The European 'constitution' sounds like a friggin' parking permit:

DRAWING INSPIRATION from the cultural, religious and humanist inheritance of Europe, from which have developed the universal values of the inviolable and inalienable rights of the human person, freedom, democracy, equality and the rule of law,

GRATEFUL to the members of the European Convention for having prepared the draft of this Constitution on behalf of the citizens and States of Europe,

OK, a rather lengthy parking permit. Incidentally, there used to be something in there about the Judeo-Christian inheritance of Europe, which is a hell of a lot bigger than the humanist one, but this was considered to be unsavoury.
3) This constitution will effectively abolish the sovereign Dutch nation. Bigger EU nations will get more voting powers, and the endowment of the European Parliament with extra powers will have a similar eroding effect on our independence.
Already, laws are being adopted in the Netherlands which would never have made it if not for the EU. Recently, a law proposal was drafted which reverses the burden of proof in cases of sexual harassment. (Which will, incidentally, lead to employers hiring fewer women in order to avoid being falsely accused, and/or putting up cameras everywhere. Thank you, EU, for curbing our civil rights!)
4) We will have to abolish most of our social welfare. The European constitution will make sure that the Netherlands won't be able to regulate their own immigration policy any longer. As a result, many immigrants will be tempted to travel here, for our welfare system is one of the most luxurious in Europe. There will be no other way of preventing an influx of fortune seekers other than curbing welfare for everyone - including the ones who have paid premiums for years. While I am not exactly a proponent of the current rate of spending on welfare in the Netherlands, the European constitution will force us to do away with nearly all of it.

Also, I'm really sick of the euro because the EMU is full of frauds, I detest the arrogant attitude of France and Germany, and have become a lot less enthusiastic about Turkish admission to the EU after the way they behaved on the EU Summit in the Netherlands last year (which was bullyish and extremely arrogant). Oh, and The Economist has quite a few reasons, too.

Incidentally, Elsevier News Weekly has also adopted the 'no stance' in its latest issue.

If anyone knows of a decent 'Vote No' banner, I'll be glad to put it up.

12:43

permalink comment(s) (2) trackback(s) (0)

One more reason to vote against the EU Constitution

Like I needed anymore. Apart from the text consisting chiefly of bureaucratic drivel, now there's the issue of Greece having bamboozled itself into the Economic and Monetary Union, the EU club for countries allowed to use the euro. Never mind that France and Germany are also flouting EMU rules all the time, albeit after joining, rather than before.

If one country votes against the EU Constitution, it's legally dead. I can't think of another way to protest against this highly undemocratic institution.

9:10

permalink comment(s) (0)

Independence Day

'We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.'

Leg daar de eerste zinnen van de preambule van het Europese 'constitutionele verdrag' naast, en dan moet ik toch een beetje huilen:

'Geïnspireerd door de culturele, religieuze en humanistische tradities van Europa, waaruit de universele waarden van de onschendbare en onvervreemdbare rechten van de menselijke persoon, democratie, gelijkheid, vrijheid en rechtsstatelijkheid zijn ontstaan...'

Hoe laat je een grondwet klinken als een parkeervergunning: leer het in Brussel. Enfin, ik was toch al tegen.

12:08

permalink comment(s) (0)