i think this is a great debate question do you think tony blair should be made the president of the European Union? I think the EU needs someone to lead them and stop them from slipping into socialism, (as is they are receiving alot of farming substities and others), and I also think this would be benificial to the USA if he does so as well because at the moment we have close political ties. I was wondering your thoughts on the issue, and if not Tony Blair then who would make a good leader for the EU?
Tony Blair himself admits to being a socialist, so technically he would not be ideal to stop them slipping into socialism. I don’t understand politics much, and I can’t see how socialism is a bad thing (from what I know) but you say it as if it’s a bad thing.
On another matter [hijack] could Tony be President of the USA?[/hijack] as you guys seem to like him more than his own people, and I heard someone say he could take any public office in the USA based on his popularity.
They are receiving a lot of farm subsidies? From who? I guess you mean the EU is handing out farm subsidies. Are you aware of the volume of the farm subsidies in the USA? I wish all farm subsidies would disappear but to acuse the EU and not the USA makes no sense.
The “slipping into socialism” is just silly. The EU has been moving away from socialism for 20 years now. I think you need to do your homework first.
from: http://ue.eu.int/en/presid.htm
http://europa.eu.int/index_en.htm has lots of information about the organisation and institutions of the E.U.
Not without a constitutional amendment, since Mr. Blair lacks the qualification of having been born a citizen of the United States.
First, currently there’s only talks about creating a president job in the EU. Wait until there’s some kind of agreement about a “constitution” of the EU which would include a president job.
Second, after the Irak issue, Blair is IMO too controversed too make a good candidate. Some old, retired guy everybody has essentially forgotten about but just vaguely remembered would probably be a better one.
-
The EU “president” , if there is ever one, will have a very limited power, hence he’s unlikely to “lead” european countries to major changes in the way they handle matters.
-
Most of what you call “socialism” are social policies, and until now, the EU essentially stood away from these policies because the issues are too controversial, and the point of view of each country and of their populations differs too widely. So, a potential “EU president” most probably won’t even try to mess up with this “socialism”
-
This “socialism” is widely supported by an overwhelming majority of the EU population. Any politician talking about eliminating these social policies is essentially commiting political suicide. It’s not likely to be different for a candidate for the EU presidency. It’s like asking : “when will a US president stop this capitalist trend in the US and implement socialism there?”
-
Tony Blair is hardly a conservative. Remember : he’s the head of the labour
Like well behaved capitalist countries aren’t giving out farm subsidies :rolleyes: (see what country I’m refering to?)
IMO, “it would be beneficial for the US” isn’t an argument which is going to convince a lot of european people…at the contrary.
As for who could be the first president of the EU, if there’s ever one, he will be IMO, as I wrote above, some not too controversial old and retired politician.
If you mean the Marxist idea of socialism, then you’d be wrong., but if you mean the progressive democratic socilaism, which dominates European politics, what is so wrong with that?
Tony Blair’s Labour party is a member of the European socialist alliance in the European Parliment, an not so many years (While Tony was a member of the Shadow Cabinet) a go they would sing ‘The Internationale’ at every Labour Party conference.
At the moment the EU operates a rotating presidency between all of it’s members, which entails very little real power.
Plenty of people, including myself, suspect that he sees the EU presidency as his next job. I feel that his support for Bush in the war is at least partly explained by this ambition, as talking to the president of the USA seems to be one of the main responsibilities.
Yes, the USA would be better off with Blair as president rather than, say, Chirac. However, what’s best for the USA will not be one of the selection criteria, although the ability to establish a good relationship with the USA will.
Remember that the EU is not a country, and each of the members of the EU already have someone to lead them. Each country makes its own decisions. As we have recently seen, the idea of a common foreign policy, for example, is ludicrous.
And I don’t see what’s so bad about socialism. Although living as I do in the UK I’ve never actually experienced any (I can’t remember the previous Labour government), so maybe I’m not in a position to judge.
And, clairobscur, Blair is effectively a conservative. Although the Labour Party is traditionally left wing and has many left wing voters and members, its current policies are very definitely right wing.
Personally I don’t think there is such a thing. Blair is as good a prospect as any in my view.
Ther borders between the right wing and the left wing are very blurred currently in Europe. For instance, recently, the German chancellor announced a reform of the welfare schemes that the conservatives wouldn’t have dreamed to implement. Though he certainly isn’t a “traditionnal” “socialist”, I wouldn’t call Blair a conservative.
if you’ve ever recieved benefits, or been seen by an NHS doctor then you’ve experienced socialism. although the labour cabinet may not be as left-leaning as you would like it to be, it is certainly not right-wing. remember it was they who pushed through radical reforms such as the minimum wage. the fact is that labour needed to drop its militant tone if it didn’t want to spend another 18 years as an unelectable party.
as for the eu presidency, who cares? it’s only a symbolic position carrying very little real authority.
Thank you.
Thank you so much for caring about the EU to such an extent hat you’re willing to call for a strong leader, to ease our addled European minds away from this “socialism” demon which has been plaguing us!
If only we had someone who could lead us into making our health and education systems into the shining bastions of the type in the USA! No more will money be fed into making people better, now we can pay insurance companies AS WELL as the medical professionals, and pay high medical bills AS WELL as our taxes. Oh, and I know that so many people in Europe are constantly whining about how all those working class people tend to find it far too easy to get their child a decent education, and that Oxford and Cambridge’s reputation as high class educational establishments would be vastly increased if it was even easier to buy your way in, rather than having to rely on picking the most intellectually adept applicants.
Man, I can’t wait for someone to save Europe and lead us away from the evils of from Socialism!
(Also, “The EU” doesn’t receive any farming subsidies. It distributes subsidies within the member states, but some states pay more than they get back, and vice versa.)
…perhaps I was a bit hasty with my remarks regarding the socialism. *I was mainly just curious at what people thought in regards to having someone lead the EU. As is I beleive the EU is a strong and good for Europe as it stands. Although being an American i cant get a totally acurate depiction of the overall status as is in europe the countries which are in the EU But on paper it looks good. I also agree with Cart when saying that i suspect that Blair beleives it is his next job regardless…as to this being a good thing im unsure at the moment. thank you for your responses.
I’m pretty sure Blair will never end up as president of EU. One aspect is that many European politicians, after living under the umbrella of the US during the cold war, now have begun to understand that they have to take greater responsibility for their own security and future, become more independant so to say. Blair’s close alignment with the US is to some extent contradictory to such a strategy.
Another matter is that Britain has been seen as kind of a “slow mover” by many in Europe lately. Britain has yet to join the monetary standard, and many Brits are reluctant to go too far too fast. The EU is in rapid development at the moment, and at some point in the near future Britain has to decide if they want to be in front or just tag along.
A EU president will not have a position equal to the power held by a US president, not for a very long time. EU is a loose union of independant nations which do not share a common language, and the need for such strong executive power is not necessary at the moment. The power base is and will continue to be the EU Parliament. And a EU president, when time comes, is likely to be elected by the representatives, and not by the people themselves.
On the other issue, I understand very well why many Americans think of Europe as “socialism”. Living in a two-party nation, the result is by some a tendcency to view politics in a filter of black & white (or maybe blue & red is a better description), hence the labels “conservative” and “liberal”. Such labels are hardly ever heard in multi-party Europe.
However, I have never thought of Europe as “socialistic”, more as Democratic-leaning, or should I say, historically center-left. There are big differences between the nations, but a run-down of the parties would look something like:
Left:
Progressive Socialists / Green (5-15%, endorses private right of ownership, but advocates state ownership of infrastructure)
Labour (20-40%, capitalistic, but advocates comprehensive public services)
Center:
Christians (10-20%, christian moral, family politics, slightly corporate-leaning)
Special interests parties (5-10%, great variety)
Right:
Conservatives (20-30%, trade and industry based, privatize public services)
Ultra-Conservatives (5-15%, anti-taxes, anti-immigration, anti-criminal, protest party)
This is all very simplified. In many nations, the conservatives are in power (Denmark, Italy, Spain, …), in others it’s Labour (Sweden, Germany, …). The pure communists (based on Marx’s ideology), were major players in western Europe prior to WWII, but they have virtually vanished today.
All good points. Arguably the only region of Europe less enthusiastic about the EU than the UK has been Scandinavia ;).
British politicians have taken senior administrative roles within EU organisations though:
Roy Jenkins – President of the European Commission
Vice-President Neil Kinnock