4 ms·

The EU Constitution was a monstrosity. For the referendum in France they actually sent a hardcopy to every registered voter... It was such a huge, unreadable do

The EU Constitution was a monstrosity. For the referendum in France they actually sent a hardcopy to every registered voter... It was such a huge, unreadable document that the people remembered the good old advice "if you don't understand, don't sign". Great example in democracy. Unfortunately, and not unusual in the EU, they carried on without taking notice and most of the content was simply moved into the Lisbon Treaty.

moomin 2y ago
If people ran with "If you don't understand, don't sign" in general, every major tech firm on the planet would collapse. More generally, the world is extremely complex. None of us understand all of it, but the constitution of the EU needs to engage with a surprisingly large percentage of it. There's no way such a document can ever be easy to read.
- mytailorisrich 2y ago
  > There's no way such a document can ever be easy to read. I strongly disagree. A Constitution ought to put forward key things. It is not to cover everything and anything. Such a key piece of legislation should be kept concise and understandable. The US Constitution is understandable. Magna Carta is understandable. The 1798 "Declaration of the Right of Man and of the Citizen" (still part of the French Constitution) is understandable. Hundreds of pages without focus wasn't [1] and was rightly rejected. The issue is that the people's voice was ignored, as is often the case in the EU when the people choose the "wrong" answer. [1] https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Treaty_establishing_a_Constitution_for_Europe https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Treaty_establishing_a_Constit...
  - moomin 2y ago
    Dunno, this reads like legalese to me: No county court is to be held save from month to month, and where the greater term used to be held, so will it be in future, nor will any sheriff or his bailiff make his tourn through the hundred save for twice a year and only in the place that is due and customary, namely once after Easter and again after Michaelmas, and the view of frankpledge is to be taken at the Michaelmas term without exception, in such a way that every man is to have his liberties which he had or used to have in the time of King H(enry II) my grandfather or which he has acquired since. The view of frankpledge is to be taken so that our peace be held and so that the tithing is to be held entire as it used to be, and so that the sheriff does not seek exceptions but remains content with that which the sheriff used to have in taking the view in the time of King H(enry) our grandfather. And you know none of the documents you mention were ever put to a popular vote?
disgruntledphd2 2y ago
> The EU Constitution was a monstrosity. I really don't agree, I thought it was much better than Lisbon (which I voted against twice on the principle that the rest of the EU didn't appear to want it).

moomin 2y ago

If people ran with "If you don't understand, don't sign" in general, every major tech firm on the planet would collapse. More generally, the world is extremely complex. None of us understand all of it, but the constitution of the EU needs to engage with a surprisingly large percentage of it. There's no way such a document can ever be easy to read.

mytailorisrich 2y ago
> There's no way such a document can ever be easy to read. I strongly disagree. A Constitution ought to put forward key things. It is not to cover everything and anything. Such a key piece of legislation should be kept concise and understandable. The US Constitution is understandable. Magna Carta is understandable. The 1798 "Declaration of the Right of Man and of the Citizen" (still part of the French Constitution) is understandable. Hundreds of pages without focus wasn't [1] and was rightly rejected. The issue is that the people's voice was ignored, as is often the case in the EU when the people choose the "wrong" answer. [1] https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Treaty_establishing_a_Constitution_for_Europe https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Treaty_establishing_a_Constit...
- moomin 2y ago
  Dunno, this reads like legalese to me: No county court is to be held save from month to month, and where the greater term used to be held, so will it be in future, nor will any sheriff or his bailiff make his tourn through the hundred save for twice a year and only in the place that is due and customary, namely once after Easter and again after Michaelmas, and the view of frankpledge is to be taken at the Michaelmas term without exception, in such a way that every man is to have his liberties which he had or used to have in the time of King H(enry II) my grandfather or which he has acquired since. The view of frankpledge is to be taken so that our peace be held and so that the tithing is to be held entire as it used to be, and so that the sheriff does not seek exceptions but remains content with that which the sheriff used to have in taking the view in the time of King H(enry) our grandfather. And you know none of the documents you mention were ever put to a popular vote?

disgruntledphd2 2y ago

> The EU Constitution was a monstrosity. I really don't agree, I thought it was much better than Lisbon (which I voted against twice on the principle that the rest of the EU didn't appear to want it).