5 ms·

I do agree with you but is not that obvious... Apparently it looks like the English dont grasp this idea...

by siscia 10y ago

valkea 10y ago
> Apparently it looks like the English dont grasp this idea... Would you care to elaborate?
ZenoArrow 10y ago
You should look into the reasons why people wanted to leave. I for one accept there will be a period of economic uncertainty, but consider it worth it in order to remove ourselves from an undemocratic institution that has power to set the laws of its members. I'd be for a democratic union, but I'll not be losing sleep over leaving an undemocratic one, even if it's a messy divorce.
- AstralStorm 10y ago
  Completely undemocratic, with representatives chosen in democratic ways, membership proportional to population (with UK getting the break there), laws voted in a democratic way.
  - spdionis 10y ago
    AND UK having veto power.
    - ZenoArrow 10y ago
      Look into the role of the European Commission.
    - rcxdude 10y ago
      Not over everything. And the system is democratic, but it does decide against the UK vote more frequently than most other countries. In that sense you can claim that the EU does not represent the UK very well.
      - gambiting 10y ago
        Well, one could make an argument that the house of lords represents exactly no one, and yet it is a part of the policy making process.
        youngtaff 10y ago
        And the Queen
        ZenoArrow 10y ago
        I'd be up for House of Lords reform as well, but let's let the dust settle on Brexit first.
        sievebrain 10y ago
        HoL can't stop legislation, only delay it, and by convention they never delay manifesto pledges. If the HoL stopped being anything more than a handbrake on laws it'd be abolished too. And as for the monarchy, well, nobody cares whilst the Queen is so disciplined about staying out of politics. If she dies and is replaced by Charles, and he doesn't change his ways, expect a constitutional change soon after.
  - ZenoArrow 10y ago
    The European Parliament isn't the central body of power in the EU. Only the European Commission can propose new laws. To give you a quick introduction to the EU's legislative process... There are three main groups involved in putting together new EU legislation: the European Commission, the European Parliament and the European Council. In terms of democratic debate, the European Parliament is where the bulk of elected representatives sit, with the Council being the 'upper house' (equivalent to the House of Lords in the UK). However, neither the Parliament nor the Council have the power to propose new laws, they can only discuss proposed laws put forward by the Commission. Therefore, it is the Commission that controls the agenda for the EU. EU Commissioners are not elected democratically. Furthermore, they are required to take an oath to put the interests of the EU first, and not take any instructions from the countries they are from. In addition to all that, the Commission has very close ties to big business. There are reasons why TTIP and CETA are being pushed forward even with resistance from MEPs. I'd recommend checking out the documentary The Brussels Business for a look into the ways the Commission and big business work together. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xMuUEd6w54E https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xMuUEd6w54E
    - claudius 10y ago
      > EU Commissioners are not elected democratically. Well, they are suggested by the democratically elected governments of the member states and either accepted or rejected by the democratically elected European Parliament. > Furthermore, they are required to take an oath to put the interests of the EU first, and not take any instructions from the countries they are from. As they should, they are to work in the interests of the EU, not a single member state. German ministers are also required to serve the whole federal republic appealing to individual states is not looked upon very favorably. > In addition to all that, the Commission has very close ties to big business. Hopefully we can solve at least some of the issues with corruption and lobbying when the most corrupt country in the world[1], which has worked against workers’ rights and increased regulation to ensure public health and safety in the EU for the last four decades, leaves. [1] http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/when-a-mafia-expert-tells-us-britain-is-the-most-corrupt-country-in-the-world-its-time-to-start-a7057686.html http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/when-a-mafia-expert-tell...
- BlackFly 10y ago
  You may be interested to know that it is in fact a democratic union. The treaty of Maastricht outlines this in detail.
  - ZenoArrow 10y ago
    See my reply to AstralStorm.
  - ptaipale 10y ago
    And still it's unable to e.g. abolish the travesty of European Parliament's monthly travel to Strasbourg. Is that according to democratic will of European people? Hardly not. It's not a hugely significant thing - maybe costs just a hundred million € per year, or a bit more, not a lot in EU context - but its symbolic nature about the essence of European Union is telling.
    - notahacker 10y ago
      All democratic polities have weird little quirks which are unpopular but never remotely likely to become an election defining issue I mean, the UK has a House of Lords...
      - ptaipale 10y ago
        True, though to me it seems the House of Lords actually serves a useful purpose.
- rodgerd 10y ago
  > but consider it worth it in order to remove ourselves from an undemocratic institution that has power to set the laws of its members. I wasn't aware you'd disestablished the House of Lords. It will indeed be delightful not to have the Anglican Church dictating social legislation!
  - ZenoArrow 10y ago
    All in good time. The push for elected peers in the House of Lords is not off the cards. To me the next big push for greater democracy is to go for proportional representation in the House of Commons.

I do agree with you but is not that obvious... Apparently it looks like the English dont grasp this idea...

by siscia 10y ago

I do agree with you but is not that obvious... Apparently it looks like the English dont grasp this idea...

valkea 10y ago

> Apparently it looks like the English dont grasp this idea... Would you care to elaborate?

ZenoArrow 10y ago

You should look into the reasons why people wanted to leave. I for one accept there will be a period of economic uncertainty, but consider it worth it in order to remove ourselves from an undemocratic institution that has power to set the laws of its members. I'd be for a democratic union, but I'll not be losing sleep over leaving an undemocratic one, even if it's a messy divorce.

AstralStorm 10y ago
Completely undemocratic, with representatives chosen in democratic ways, membership proportional to population (with UK getting the break there), laws voted in a democratic way.
- spdionis 10y ago
  AND UK having veto power.
  - ZenoArrow 10y ago
    Look into the role of the European Commission.
  - rcxdude 10y ago
    Not over everything. And the system is democratic, but it does decide against the UK vote more frequently than most other countries. In that sense you can claim that the EU does not represent the UK very well.
    - gambiting 10y ago
      Well, one could make an argument that the house of lords represents exactly no one, and yet it is a part of the policy making process.
      - youngtaff 10y ago
        And the Queen
      - ZenoArrow 10y ago
        I'd be up for House of Lords reform as well, but let's let the dust settle on Brexit first.
      - sievebrain 10y ago
        HoL can't stop legislation, only delay it, and by convention they never delay manifesto pledges. If the HoL stopped being anything more than a handbrake on laws it'd be abolished too. And as for the monarchy, well, nobody cares whilst the Queen is so disciplined about staying out of politics. If she dies and is replaced by Charles, and he doesn't change his ways, expect a constitutional change soon after.
- ZenoArrow 10y ago
  The European Parliament isn't the central body of power in the EU. Only the European Commission can propose new laws. To give you a quick introduction to the EU's legislative process... There are three main groups involved in putting together new EU legislation: the European Commission, the European Parliament and the European Council. In terms of democratic debate, the European Parliament is where the bulk of elected representatives sit, with the Council being the 'upper house' (equivalent to the House of Lords in the UK). However, neither the Parliament nor the Council have the power to propose new laws, they can only discuss proposed laws put forward by the Commission. Therefore, it is the Commission that controls the agenda for the EU. EU Commissioners are not elected democratically. Furthermore, they are required to take an oath to put the interests of the EU first, and not take any instructions from the countries they are from. In addition to all that, the Commission has very close ties to big business. There are reasons why TTIP and CETA are being pushed forward even with resistance from MEPs. I'd recommend checking out the documentary The Brussels Business for a look into the ways the Commission and big business work together. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xMuUEd6w54E https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xMuUEd6w54E
  - claudius 10y ago
    > EU Commissioners are not elected democratically. Well, they are suggested by the democratically elected governments of the member states and either accepted or rejected by the democratically elected European Parliament. > Furthermore, they are required to take an oath to put the interests of the EU first, and not take any instructions from the countries they are from. As they should, they are to work in the interests of the EU, not a single member state. German ministers are also required to serve the whole federal republic appealing to individual states is not looked upon very favorably. > In addition to all that, the Commission has very close ties to big business. Hopefully we can solve at least some of the issues with corruption and lobbying when the most corrupt country in the world[1], which has worked against workers’ rights and increased regulation to ensure public health and safety in the EU for the last four decades, leaves. [1] http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/when-a-mafia-expert-tells-us-britain-is-the-most-corrupt-country-in-the-world-its-time-to-start-a7057686.html http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/when-a-mafia-expert-tell...
BlackFly 10y ago
You may be interested to know that it is in fact a democratic union. The treaty of Maastricht outlines this in detail.
- ZenoArrow 10y ago
  See my reply to AstralStorm.
- ptaipale 10y ago
  And still it's unable to e.g. abolish the travesty of European Parliament's monthly travel to Strasbourg. Is that according to democratic will of European people? Hardly not. It's not a hugely significant thing - maybe costs just a hundred million € per year, or a bit more, not a lot in EU context - but its symbolic nature about the essence of European Union is telling.
  - notahacker 10y ago
    All democratic polities have weird little quirks which are unpopular but never remotely likely to become an election defining issue I mean, the UK has a House of Lords...
    - ptaipale 10y ago
      True, though to me it seems the House of Lords actually serves a useful purpose.
rodgerd 10y ago
> but consider it worth it in order to remove ourselves from an undemocratic institution that has power to set the laws of its members. I wasn't aware you'd disestablished the House of Lords. It will indeed be delightful not to have the Anglican Church dictating social legislation!
- ZenoArrow 10y ago
  All in good time. The push for elected peers in the House of Lords is not off the cards. To me the next big push for greater democracy is to go for proportional representation in the House of Commons.