A Constitution for Europe?
- The paradox of equality
- Democracy and legitimacy
- The lack of legitimacy in the process of adoption of the European Constitution
- An eternal provider of resources
- The policy of "national champions"
- The EU as a welfare state: example of the Common Agricultural Policy
- 'Brussels made me do it'
- The notion of pragmatism: example of the fishermen
- From a 'negative integration' to a 'positive integration'
- A Constitution for a powerful Union
- A place to find between the biggest economies, United States and Asia
- The European " in-betweenness "
In May 2005, every French home received a book titled Treaty for the European Union. Based on the notions of liberty and democracy, the European Union was already divided on its decision to adopt the European Constitution or not. Defending the ideas of freedom since their adhesion to the EU, a lot of political leaders didn't hesitate however to withdraw the power of expression to the citizens. So some countries submitted the Treaty to their Parliament as they were scared by the reaction of their compatriots for a long time with their own political mistakes. Some others chose to give the first payers the right to express themselves with the slogan "no taxation without representation". So did Jacques Chirac, who decided to organize a referendum in France on the 29th of May 2005 to decide whether France should ratify the proposed Constitution. A majority of the voters rejected the treaty. The question on everyone's minds was as to why the EU needs a Constitution. Some countries like United Kingdom can survive without it. This rejection of the Constitution was maybe a consequence of a 50-year-old absenteeism, and a rejection of an "invisible hand" which can use the stringent power given to it with the following of the old rule of "carrot and baton".