Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Thursday January 19 2017, @05:24PM   Printer-friendly
from the making-it-all-look-nice dept.

Turkey's ruling party is passing constitutional reforms to consolidate power:

Turkey's parliament approved the first seven articles in a second round of voting overnight on a constitutional bill that will extend President Tayyip Erdogan's powers, keeping the reform on course for a spring referendum.

The two largest opposition parties in parliament say the 18-article bill, which could enable Erdogan to rule until 2029, will fuel authoritarianism in the NATO member and European Union candidate country. The ruling AK Party, backed by the nationalist MHP, says it will bring the strong executive leadership needed to prevent a return to the fragile coalition governments of the past.

The seven articles approved overnight include increasing the number of MPs to 600 from 550, lowering the minimum age to be a lawmaker to 18 from 25, and holding parliamentary and presidential elections together every five years.

Also at CNN, Time, Al Jazeera, and The Guardian. You might also be interested in this take from the Daily Sabah.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by jmorris on Friday January 20 2017, @12:26AM

    by jmorris (4844) on Friday January 20 2017, @12:26AM (#456309)

    If you consider NATO as purely an anti-Soviet Union organization, then you are right.

    That was the official justification. Making sure Germany stayed peaceful was probably the unstated one. Neither apply now.

    If you consider NATO as a, "we countries are strategically aligned with each other and see more value in acting together and presenting a united front than acting as individuals," then you are not.

    Look at a list of NATO countries. How many do you think the US should wage total war over? As for a united front, united against who? Who are we all putting a united front against?

    For that matter, even if you consider NATO merely as an anti-Russia organization, then you are not as well. And don't say there isn't justification for worry about Russia... just look at what happened in Ukraine.

    Russia has a smaller GDP than Germany alone, if Europe can't contain the bear, perhaps they should ask why? Could it be the unsustainable welfare state and declining birth rate?

    No, NATO, the EU, TPP, the UN and other transnational efforts to bring everyone into one world government is a problem. There is simply too much diversity to have ONE set of rules, one government, etc. without a majority being unhappy. We are, as you note, hitting the exact same problem trying to have one size fits all government here in the U.S., imagine how insane it is to propose one government for Europe?

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 20 2017, @08:39AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 20 2017, @08:39AM (#456442)

    Nitpick: most western european countries' population has bounced and is now closer to sustenance rate (1.5~1.6). It is not because of immigrants.

    • (Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Saturday January 21 2017, @06:08AM

      by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Saturday January 21 2017, @06:08AM (#456874) Journal

      Don't confuse him with facts. He has an axe to grind.

      --
      I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...