4 ms·

If you call the UK a democracy then yes the EU is very democratic. Also assuming whitehall will produce less redtape than brussels is probably not going to be

by jerven 10y ago

If you call the UK a democracy then yes the EU is very democratic. Also assuming whitehall will produce less redtape than brussels is probably not going to be true :(

ZenoArrow 10y ago
> "If you call the UK a democracy then yes the EU is very democratic." Explain.
- ionised 10y ago
  It's a plutocracy. Has been for hundreds of years. The UK has an unlected upper House of Lords. It has a monarch that technically still has a lot of power, even if it isn't excercised. London is the primary focus of the country's expenditure and may as well be a city state. The City of London, an entity unto itself is rife with fraud and corruption on a global scale, and essentially owns our politicians, much like Goldman Sachs basically owns the US government.
  - jerven 10y ago
    Plus the way that districts for the house of commons operate... leading to a less than representative commons.
  - ZenoArrow 10y ago
    > "It's a plutocracy. Has been for hundreds of years. > "The UK has an unlected upper House of Lords." The balance of power has shifted in those 'hundreds of years'. The House of Lords no longer has the same level of power it did 200 years ago. The Parliament Acts of 1911 and 1949 shifted the bulk of the power for law making to the House of Commons. If you're not familiar with these bills, I recommend taking a look... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliament_Act_1911 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliament_Act_1911 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliament_Act_1949 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliament_Act_1949 > "It has a monarch that technically still has a lot of power, even if it isn't excercised." The moment the Monarch tries to exercise that power is the moment the Monarch seals their fate, as dissolution of the monarchy would almost inevitably follow soon after. I'd hardly call that 'power'. > "London is the primary focus of the country's expenditure and may as well be a city state." I agree that spending in London is disproportionately high compared to the rest of the country. However, it's worth remembering how big a part of the UK that London is. The population of Greater London is roughly 9.8 million. The population of the UK as a whole is roughly 64.1 million. Therefore, approximately 15% of everyone in the UK lives in London/Greater London. To put that in perspective, that's more people than live in the next 6 largest urban areas combined (Greater Manchester, West Midlands, West Yorkshire, Greater Glasgow, Liverpool, South Hampshire). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_urban_areas_in_the_United_Kingdom https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_urban_areas_in_the_Uni... There are signs that UK public spending outside London will be improving. At the moment public spending in the UK is guided by the Barnett formula, which even the author himself admits was a 'terrible mistake'... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barnett_formula https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barnett_formula > "The City of London, an entity unto itself is rife with fraud and corruption on a global scale, and essentially owns our politicians, much like Goldman Sachs basically owns the US government." The City of London is rife with fraud and corruption, but that's no argument for the EU, which is equally in bed with big business. The lobbying industry for the EU is massive, second only to the US. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/may/08/lobbyists-european-parliament-brussels-corporate https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/may/08/lobbyists-euro...
    - nicky0 10y ago
      Also the UK parliament cannot be called a representative democracy. In the last general election 13% of voters voted for a UKIP candidate but the party won only 1 seat out of 650. A properly representative system would give them 84. Same with Green Party, 1 seat from 4%, should have 26. Meanwhile the Tories have an overall majority on 37% of the vote.
      - ZenoArrow 10y ago
        We do need electoral reform in the UK as well, leaving the EU is just the first step in driving towards a better democracy.
        deleted 10y ago
        [deleted]
        pbhjpbhj 10y ago
        We have the Tories in power, what exactly are they going to do to improve democracy - their whole modus operandi is about expanding class division, I can hardly see them doing anything to empower the demos.
        ZenoArrow 10y ago
        We don't have to wait until the Tories decide they want to improve democracy. The vast majority of social change happens from the grassroots up, it's up to the general public to push for it. I personally will be pushing for improving the standard of news coverage in the UK, so that when the time comes to push for proportional representation, we'll be better placed to see it put in place.
        pbhjpbhj 10y ago
        We already voted on PR and it was terrible, somehow they managed to get the worst possibly version of PR on the ballot and it was voted against; if the Tories retain power I can't see them moving for electoral reform from the top as FPTP is keeping them in a majority. How do you see the grassroots transitioning the UK voting system for general elections, what power do we have if the MPs don't want it?

by jerven 10y ago

If you call the UK a democracy then yes the EU is very democratic. Also assuming whitehall will produce less redtape than brussels is probably not going to be true :(

ZenoArrow 10y ago

> "If you call the UK a democracy then yes the EU is very democratic." Explain.

ionised 10y ago
It's a plutocracy. Has been for hundreds of years. The UK has an unlected upper House of Lords. It has a monarch that technically still has a lot of power, even if it isn't excercised. London is the primary focus of the country's expenditure and may as well be a city state. The City of London, an entity unto itself is rife with fraud and corruption on a global scale, and essentially owns our politicians, much like Goldman Sachs basically owns the US government.
- jerven 10y ago
  Plus the way that districts for the house of commons operate... leading to a less than representative commons.
- ZenoArrow 10y ago
  > "It's a plutocracy. Has been for hundreds of years. > "The UK has an unlected upper House of Lords." The balance of power has shifted in those 'hundreds of years'. The House of Lords no longer has the same level of power it did 200 years ago. The Parliament Acts of 1911 and 1949 shifted the bulk of the power for law making to the House of Commons. If you're not familiar with these bills, I recommend taking a look... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliament_Act_1911 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliament_Act_1911 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliament_Act_1949 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliament_Act_1949 > "It has a monarch that technically still has a lot of power, even if it isn't excercised." The moment the Monarch tries to exercise that power is the moment the Monarch seals their fate, as dissolution of the monarchy would almost inevitably follow soon after. I'd hardly call that 'power'. > "London is the primary focus of the country's expenditure and may as well be a city state." I agree that spending in London is disproportionately high compared to the rest of the country. However, it's worth remembering how big a part of the UK that London is. The population of Greater London is roughly 9.8 million. The population of the UK as a whole is roughly 64.1 million. Therefore, approximately 15% of everyone in the UK lives in London/Greater London. To put that in perspective, that's more people than live in the next 6 largest urban areas combined (Greater Manchester, West Midlands, West Yorkshire, Greater Glasgow, Liverpool, South Hampshire). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_urban_areas_in_the_United_Kingdom https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_urban_areas_in_the_Uni... There are signs that UK public spending outside London will be improving. At the moment public spending in the UK is guided by the Barnett formula, which even the author himself admits was a 'terrible mistake'... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barnett_formula https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barnett_formula > "The City of London, an entity unto itself is rife with fraud and corruption on a global scale, and essentially owns our politicians, much like Goldman Sachs basically owns the US government." The City of London is rife with fraud and corruption, but that's no argument for the EU, which is equally in bed with big business. The lobbying industry for the EU is massive, second only to the US. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/may/08/lobbyists-european-parliament-brussels-corporate https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/may/08/lobbyists-euro...
  - nicky0 10y ago
    Also the UK parliament cannot be called a representative democracy. In the last general election 13% of voters voted for a UKIP candidate but the party won only 1 seat out of 650. A properly representative system would give them 84. Same with Green Party, 1 seat from 4%, should have 26. Meanwhile the Tories have an overall majority on 37% of the vote.
    - ZenoArrow 10y ago
      We do need electoral reform in the UK as well, leaving the EU is just the first step in driving towards a better democracy.
      - deleted 10y ago
        [deleted]
      - pbhjpbhj 10y ago
        We have the Tories in power, what exactly are they going to do to improve democracy - their whole modus operandi is about expanding class division, I can hardly see them doing anything to empower the demos.
        ZenoArrow 10y ago
        We don't have to wait until the Tories decide they want to improve democracy. The vast majority of social change happens from the grassroots up, it's up to the general public to push for it. I personally will be pushing for improving the standard of news coverage in the UK, so that when the time comes to push for proportional representation, we'll be better placed to see it put in place.
        pbhjpbhj 10y ago
        We already voted on PR and it was terrible, somehow they managed to get the worst possibly version of PR on the ballot and it was voted against; if the Tories retain power I can't see them moving for electoral reform from the top as FPTP is keeping them in a majority. How do you see the grassroots transitioning the UK voting system for general elections, what power do we have if the MPs don't want it?