Sometimes I like to compare it to compare the EU as a creation to the organisation of empires. We have the dimension of Empire but there is a great difference. Empires were usually made with force with a centre imposing diktat, a will on the others. Now what we have is the first non-Imperial empire. We have 27 countries that fully decided to work together and to pool their sovereignty. I believe it is a great construction and we should be proud of it. At least, we in the Commission are proud of it.So, now the EU is an empire, is it? And forcing a constitution upon a populace that has already made it's ojcetion to it known, that is not 'imposing diktat'?
Oh, and about the Turnip, Barosso has the arrogance to say this:
“What is the point in comparing the reform treaty with the draft constitution? We believe the new text is better than the old one, so why bother comparing the two?”Because, dear Manual, we don't trust you! You may think the text is better, but better in what way? By one of your own underlings admission, your definition of better is a text that is even more incomprehensible then its predescessor. And I quote:
"We made a real effort to be opaque," one senior negotiator boasted. Several countries -- notably Britain, France and the Netherlands -- had insisted the result must look nothing like a constitution to avoid having to hold a referendum, he said.But a turnip is still a turnip. That you have the arrogance to tell us we should not bother comparing the Turnip to Turnip senior, because YOU think it is better, just shows us that YOU (the lot of YOU) are not into democracy and that, frankly, YOU (the lot of YOU) are not fit for any position of leadership. You non-imperially imperial nincompoop!
EU Referendum has a couple of choice remarks about that quote you may be interested in. England Expects is even more outspoken.