Print

Print


Fully agreed!

...by the way, your English is perfect!

Manuel



Manuel Magalhaes
[log in to unmask]


ALTRAN TECHNOLOGIES UK
The Counting House
4th Floor, 53 Tooley St.
London SE1 2QN
United Kingdom

Phone: +44 (0)20 7397 71 00
Fax:   +44 (0)20 7397 71 01
eFax:  +44 (0)87 0138 80 59

www.altran-group.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Inés Calzada Gutiérrez [mailto:[log in to unmask]] 
Sent: 21 February 2002 19:49
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Abstention


Well, I think it´s important to launch a debate about the consecuences of
the Euro, of course. But I understand the Euro as the last stone in an
already stablished set of  european institutions. Just another step in the
development of a specific "model of Europe". Maybe the debate would be more
fruitful if it includes the analysis of the institutions of the EU as a
whole. (I think someone wrote something similar in this list)
About the "abstentionism" (I know is not the main topic, but it seems quite
interesting to me), I would say that the problem is not if it´s right or
wrong in moral terms, but if it´s a good or bad strategy in political terms
(or "tactic", like Pablo said). I don´t think abstentionism is a good
strategy (in general) because the % of abstention is a very ambiguous index.
It can be explained as dissent (the population is angry with the situation,
so they don´t vote) or consent (the population is so happy with the
situation that they don´t care to vote). This ambiguity makes the % of
abstention easily instrumentalized from very different positions, and easily
ignored from the Government. (and also very dificult to analyse in marxist
terms).
 
Best wishes and sorry for my bad english,
                                                               Inés.




----- Original Message ----- 
From: Pablo Quinones 
To: [log in to unmask] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 9:08 PM
Subject: Re: Euro vote


I fully agree with Julian Wells and Michael Fisher, except for one minor
point: I think is not always wrong to be "abstentionist", in my opinion it
is only a question about tactic and it have to be defined case by case.
However, in this case I also think it is wrong.