6 ms·

In fact, at this moment, a united Europe may represent the last significant hope for Western liberal democracy. Past Europe, the superpowers are USA, Russia, C

In fact, at this moment, a united Europe may represent the last significant hope for Western liberal democracy. Past Europe, the superpowers are USA, Russia, China...

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
mike-cardwell 10y ago
So, super powers aren't working out for the people they govern, so the solution is to create another super power? Centralising political power might not actually be the best thing for "the people". Might be good for GDP though, which I guess is more important? </s>
- kuschku 10y ago
  So, who is rather able to defend privacy rights when the Chinese or American megacorporations come? Iceland, with its 300'000 citizen? Or the EU, with 500'000'000 citizen, a GDP of 17 trillion? The only way to police corporations is by having a state that is more powerful than them. And with corporations going multinational, superpowers are necessary.
orbifold 10y ago
Except in many ways the EU was conceived by US planners to eliminate popular control and provide a negotiating partner for the US that could be dealt with as a whole. The EU is far less democratic and more friendly to corporations and neo-liberalism than ~50% of the national parties in Europe, which often contain a significant democratic-socialist block.
- touristtam 10y ago
  As much as I understand this narative, it makes sounds like the europeans have not been in control of their own destiny since the fatal events of the last century. But that is giving way too much credit to USA's federal government, where in fact this should be recognized as the triumph of corporation control over states.
- doikor 10y ago
  > The EU is far less democratic All the people in the controlling bodies (well at least the places that should be voted for. Voting for judges etc. is madness) in EU are appointed by the member nations (either by vote or appointed) European Council: Heads of state of the member nations (president chosen by vote within) European Commission: One member appointed by each country (so usually someone from the ruling coalition within each country). Sworn to represent the benefits of EU as a whole and not single countries. President proposed by the Council and voted on by the Parliament European Parliament: Members chosen by vote from each country. President (speaker) voted within. So both executive and legislative levels are voted in or representatives of a democratically chosen government. Looks like democracy to me.
  - richmarr 10y ago
    I'm pro-EU but there's plenty to be unhappy about. For example the European Parliament can't introduce legislation... that power is reserved for the European Commission, which seems to use it in a particularly pro-lobbyist manner.
    - candiodari 10y ago
      You forgot to mention that the commission can also bypass the parliament to get laws approved, in the emergency procedure the commission and the council approve legislation.
      - doikor 10y ago
        But both are still filled by people appointed by democratic governments of member states. And still that only applies to handling "a financial crisis" by giving aid to member state(s) and needs qualified majority (85% in this case so 24 out of 28 votes in both the Council and Commission). Basically how the Council has been setup is that you usually need a unanimous or 20 out of 28 votes to get anything done.
        candiodari 10y ago
- sergiosgc 10y ago
  The EU suffers from typical problems of federal governments. It feels distant and disconnected from the population. It compounds this with a democratic disconnect, where lots of officials aren't directly elected. However, having said this, governance is actually quite good. In my opinion, EU central powers actually correct many of the blunders that national politicians do. Not that it couldn't be better, but one must acknowledge EU institutions are net positive, and not bad at all. Europe is much much better with the EU than with disparate national governments
- bogomipz 10y ago
  >"Except in many ways the EU was conceived by US planners to eliminate popular control and provide a negotiating partner for the US that could be dealt with as a whole." What are you referring to specifically, the Marshall Plan? Because that would be quite a conspiracy theory. A Federalist Union in Europe was conceived of by an Italian named Altiero Spinelli. The Marshall Plan was signed in 1948 and the Treaty of Maastricht in 1993. https://www.brugesgroup.com/media-centre/papers/8-papers/803-godfather-of-the-european-union-altiero-spinelli https://www.brugesgroup.com/media-centre/papers/8-papers/803...
angry-hacker 10y ago
Europeans don't want liberal democracy anymore, that is the problem. It has failed people in its form and if leaders don't wake up now, the EU will be doomed and who knows what that brings next. Brexit, Le Pen etc. are consequences, not the reason.
- richmarr 10y ago
  > Europeans don't want liberal democracy anymore, that is the problem. A little hyperbolic, but true if you add a ton of caveats. In the UK people have been subjected to a 25-year barrage of anti-EU sentiment from the tabloid press, that's frequently misleading or outright untrue. For example, the (entirely fabricated) front-page headline that the EU wanted to ban all bent bananas, and more recently that the EU wanted to ban bananas from being sold in bunches of more than 2 or 3. Retractions are published in small print on page 27.
  - angry-hacker 10y ago
    I don't think it has anything to do with bananas. Brussels have too much power and byrocracy. It's mainly about mass immigration. EU was meant to be about trade and free movement inside our borders, not some EU super state and Brussels telling what to do. People want nation states, no one voted for mass immigration. You can say racist all you want but that doesn't change the fact.
    - Oletros 10y ago
      To understand your point, in what mass migration are you thinking about? And what EU policy allowed it?
      - angry-hacker 10y ago
        Merkel/Brussels/EU telling how to handle refugees, how many should (independent) EU state take them, when etc. People don't like it or want it. They want to decide decisions like that on their own.

In fact, at this moment, a united Europe may represent the last significant hope for Western liberal democracy. Past Europe, the superpowers are USA, Russia, China...

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

mike-cardwell 10y ago

So, super powers aren't working out for the people they govern, so the solution is to create another super power? Centralising political power might not actually be the best thing for "the people". Might be good for GDP though, which I guess is more important? </s>

kuschku 10y ago
So, who is rather able to defend privacy rights when the Chinese or American megacorporations come? Iceland, with its 300'000 citizen? Or the EU, with 500'000'000 citizen, a GDP of 17 trillion? The only way to police corporations is by having a state that is more powerful than them. And with corporations going multinational, superpowers are necessary.

orbifold 10y ago

Except in many ways the EU was conceived by US planners to eliminate popular control and provide a negotiating partner for the US that could be dealt with as a whole. The EU is far less democratic and more friendly to corporations and neo-liberalism than ~50% of the national parties in Europe, which often contain a significant democratic-socialist block.

touristtam 10y ago
As much as I understand this narative, it makes sounds like the europeans have not been in control of their own destiny since the fatal events of the last century. But that is giving way too much credit to USA's federal government, where in fact this should be recognized as the triumph of corporation control over states.
doikor 10y ago
> The EU is far less democratic All the people in the controlling bodies (well at least the places that should be voted for. Voting for judges etc. is madness) in EU are appointed by the member nations (either by vote or appointed) European Council: Heads of state of the member nations (president chosen by vote within) European Commission: One member appointed by each country (so usually someone from the ruling coalition within each country). Sworn to represent the benefits of EU as a whole and not single countries. President proposed by the Council and voted on by the Parliament European Parliament: Members chosen by vote from each country. President (speaker) voted within. So both executive and legislative levels are voted in or representatives of a democratically chosen government. Looks like democracy to me.
- richmarr 10y ago
  I'm pro-EU but there's plenty to be unhappy about. For example the European Parliament can't introduce legislation... that power is reserved for the European Commission, which seems to use it in a particularly pro-lobbyist manner.
  - candiodari 10y ago
    You forgot to mention that the commission can also bypass the parliament to get laws approved, in the emergency procedure the commission and the council approve legislation.
    - doikor 10y ago
      But both are still filled by people appointed by democratic governments of member states. And still that only applies to handling "a financial crisis" by giving aid to member state(s) and needs qualified majority (85% in this case so 24 out of 28 votes in both the Council and Commission). Basically how the Council has been setup is that you usually need a unanimous or 20 out of 28 votes to get anything done.
      - candiodari 10y ago
sergiosgc 10y ago
The EU suffers from typical problems of federal governments. It feels distant and disconnected from the population. It compounds this with a democratic disconnect, where lots of officials aren't directly elected. However, having said this, governance is actually quite good. In my opinion, EU central powers actually correct many of the blunders that national politicians do. Not that it couldn't be better, but one must acknowledge EU institutions are net positive, and not bad at all. Europe is much much better with the EU than with disparate national governments
bogomipz 10y ago
>"Except in many ways the EU was conceived by US planners to eliminate popular control and provide a negotiating partner for the US that could be dealt with as a whole." What are you referring to specifically, the Marshall Plan? Because that would be quite a conspiracy theory. A Federalist Union in Europe was conceived of by an Italian named Altiero Spinelli. The Marshall Plan was signed in 1948 and the Treaty of Maastricht in 1993. https://www.brugesgroup.com/media-centre/papers/8-papers/803-godfather-of-the-european-union-altiero-spinelli https://www.brugesgroup.com/media-centre/papers/8-papers/803...

angry-hacker 10y ago

Europeans don't want liberal democracy anymore, that is the problem. It has failed people in its form and if leaders don't wake up now, the EU will be doomed and who knows what that brings next. Brexit, Le Pen etc. are consequences, not the reason.

richmarr 10y ago
> Europeans don't want liberal democracy anymore, that is the problem. A little hyperbolic, but true if you add a ton of caveats. In the UK people have been subjected to a 25-year barrage of anti-EU sentiment from the tabloid press, that's frequently misleading or outright untrue. For example, the (entirely fabricated) front-page headline that the EU wanted to ban all bent bananas, and more recently that the EU wanted to ban bananas from being sold in bunches of more than 2 or 3. Retractions are published in small print on page 27.
- angry-hacker 10y ago
  I don't think it has anything to do with bananas. Brussels have too much power and byrocracy. It's mainly about mass immigration. EU was meant to be about trade and free movement inside our borders, not some EU super state and Brussels telling what to do. People want nation states, no one voted for mass immigration. You can say racist all you want but that doesn't change the fact.
  - Oletros 10y ago
    To understand your point, in what mass migration are you thinking about? And what EU policy allowed it?
    - angry-hacker 10y ago
      Merkel/Brussels/EU telling how to handle refugees, how many should (independent) EU state take them, when etc. People don't like it or want it. They want to decide decisions like that on their own.