No, I don't.
let me put in another perspective. how many those of said "yes" were assuming that turkish society would change?
the lack of discrimination is valid both ways!
OK. I think where we could agree is that the unqualified question about whether Turkey should be allowed to join the EU is a stupid question. Personally, I think more specific questions should have been asked of everyone (such as: "Allow Turkey to accede if it fulfills all conditions?" "allow to accede once there is deeper integration?" "Do you think Turkey is able to fulfill all conditions... in 5 years, 10 years, 20 years?"). *Lunatic*, n. One whose delusions are out of fashion.
ONE - which part of the respondents to question 2 (T2Q) should answer to the question of table 3 (T3Q)?
TWO - which question or questions should substitute T2Q? ...........................
there is a connection between the two points, and I think that if we address question II first we may still agree on question I. so in this post i'll address question II; in a next, parallel, post i'll address question I. post titles codify this.
PUD-TWO will be discussed bellow .............................
It seems many different reasons can justify why one opposes or is in favour of Turkey becoming a member of the EU. we have:
Factors extrinsic to Turkey, such as
- is the EU ready to take new members? (>> is it mature, in terms of decision processes? >> are the new members states already integrated, and so we can continue enlargement under?) ) - can the EU take any more members at all? (>> may there be a limit number of members-states before the decision process colapse? OR >> may there be a limit number of member-states after which the founding members cannot obtain the advantages from participating in the association that justifies their financial support to the cohesion of the group?)
- factors specific to the entrance of Turkey ( >> the fact that Turkey is mostly in Asia (96% of its territory >> is Turkey a European culture? >> is Turkey too big and poor? >> was it not Turkey a country which kept SE Europe under its control for hundreads of years? >> is the geopolitical agenda of Turkey compatible to the one of major european powers?)
(Resuming) PUD-TWO Main Result: These are too many questions. they deserve a serious poll on their own.
Corolary a you cannot possible discuss the turkish accession problem in detail in this poll. Corolary b therefore the poll should be limitted to T2Q. T2Q is not a bad question. you just cannot elaborate from it.
In table 4 fnQ2 is mixed with all of of Q2. therefore the mixture in T4 (no question here) is enriched in fnQ2 and depleted in aQ2.
-------------------------
was this answering style too pompous for you?
