The European Constitution

[Sgt. Boomer]

The main problem is that the vote doesn’t really matter. The “constitution” was largely just meant to codify what was already being done in the EU. Schroeder has already said that the constitution “was still needed to build a strong Europe and the ratification process should continue as planned.” The no votes might slow down the process, but to quote the Torygraph: “…the project was never meant to be democratic. From the first, the EU\'s founding fathers understood that it needed to be immune to public opinion.” [Mere democracy won't stop the EU machine]

As for reasonable debate leading up to the referendums, most bureaucrats were predicting the apocalypse should it fail: “…both the Dutch prime minister, Jan-Peter Balkenende, and Sweden\'s EU commissioner, Margot Walstrom, declared that the alternative to the constitution was the death camps of Auschwitz and Theresienstadt. These historic crimes had been produced not by Nazism but by (in Walstrom\'s words) “the old intergovernmental way of doing things”.” [If the constitution falls... By John O'Sullivan]

So the question of whether you agree with the current policies and ideology of the EU is far less relevant than whether you want to entrust your future to a less open, less accountable political body and system that will only get worse as their power increases.