8 ms·

Why is it that European governments seem to act in the interests of their citizens and just about all other governments default policy positions is to act again

Why is it that European governments seem to act in the interests of their citizens and just about all other governments default policy positions is to act against the interests of the citizens?

secfirstmd 9y ago
Parliamentary systems in general are more responsive than Presidential ones. Also, most of us EU nationals don't see EU structures as very democratically responsive. Fairly sure most of us only send the B Team to the EU parliament. E.g retired national politicians, or people who couldn't get elected for national parliaments. Also, it gets a lot less coverage than national parliaments, so members are free to vote on random things without the same amount of scrutiny.
- forgottenacc57 9y ago
  Other countries primary concern is to give big business and the rich anything they want.
- jopsen 9y ago
  Yeah, the EU works surprisingly well... I mean given how little attention it gets the EU institutions makes a lot of good calls. Granted, it would likely change it more controversial topics was handled by EU.
  - krylon 9y ago
    OTOH, sometimes national governments will try establish policies at the EU level that they know will be unpopular at home, so can face their voters and claim they don't really want this, but look, that evil EU makes us. That was how the data retention laws were established before the European Court of Justice decided that it was illegal/unconstitutional (unsure what term to use here).
- NetStrikeForce 9y ago
  > most of us EU nationals don't see EU structures as very democratically responsive. Whilst I got the same feeling, this really needs to be backed up by data. Do you know any reliable polls about it?
  - jrimbault 9y ago
    The recent elections (last year or so) in Europe showed a great deal of anti-EU feelings from some parts of the population.
    - NetStrikeForce 9y ago
      Op said "most of EU nationals". You say "a great deal" - but I can't really put that into numbers. "Most" means >51% but "a great deal" is just what I call (please don't get offense) bullshit-speak. I have asked for numbers and the elections in different European countries this and last year did not show majorities of anti-EU feelings. Netherlands, France, Austria, Spain, ... am I missing something? The fact is only Greece has a majority that dislikes the EU (I'd say for obvious reasons). Not even the UK is polling that way right now.
      - secfirstmd 9y ago
        Yes I think it's also about which part of the EU. The majority seem to support the EU as a whole but some of the political structures like the Parliament and Commission - less so. "Since 2012, there has been a steady increase in Parliament of the fight against terrorism and respect for individual freedoms as a priority policy for the European Parliament, and this is now in second place (42%, +8 compared with 2015). Meanwhile, some other indicators remain relatively unchanged. A clear majority of Europeans still believe that being a member of the European Union is a good thing (53%, -2), and that their country has benefitted from this membership (60%, =). Likewise, around seven respondents in ten think that there is more solidarity amongst Europeans than issues which separate them (71%, -3). Nearly one European in two also shares the opinion that a harmonised social welfare system reinforces their feeling of being a European citizen (46%, +1). We also noted that the neutral image which Europeans have of the European Parliament (44%, -2), and the more significant role which they want to see it play (46%, +2), are two indicators which also remain stable. In addition, Europeans remain well informed about the European Parliament. Finally, other results show a decline in this survey. For example, Europeans feel that their voice counts less and less, both at national and at European level. However, in 26 of the 28 Member States, they felt that their voice counts more in their own country (53% in average, -10 compared with 2015) than at EU level (37% in average, -2). When asked about the future situation, Europeans are increasingly pessimistic, both in the EU (54% « things are going in the wrong direction », +13 compared with 2015) and in their own country (58% « id. », +14), Among the various elements of European identity, a significant decline in the single currency as one of the essential elements is also noticeable (33%, -6), particularly in the Euro area." Source: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/atyourservice/en/20161110PVL00113/Parlemeter-2016 http://www.europarl.europa.eu/atyourservice/en/20161110PVL00...
- jacquesm 9y ago
  > Fairly sure most of us only send the B Team to the EU parliament. E.g retired national politicians, or people who couldn't get elected for national parliaments. I wouldn't call 'retired national politicians' the 'B' team, those are more likely the 'A' team, no longer worried about their career they are much freer to operate than their national counterparts, besides that they have lots of experience. A Dutch example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neelie_Kroes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neelie_Kroes
  - barrkel 9y ago
    Neelie isn't an MEP. MEPs don't have much power, so ambitious people aren't interested, so the B team gets sent, and then nobody wants to give them much more responsibility.
    - smhg 9y ago
      Neelie was indeed not an example of a MEP (read different comments in parent-parent-parent's thread for distinction). But there are definitely examples of driven 'A' team politicians in the EP. And those are more easily heard because of the lack of attention to the laid back types. So the possible higher amount of the latter isn't even an all black-white bad thing. And since many are positive about the results of the EP: does it even matter?
  - gambiting 9y ago
    The current president of the European Council, Donald Tusk, used to be the Polish Prime minister before he took the position in Brussels. Definitely not B team.
    - secfirstmd 9y ago
      Yes the European Council and European Commission tend to get the more experienced and capable former national politicians but the Parliament generally doesn't...Certainly not in the European countries that I have lived, worked and studied in/about.
devoply 9y ago
Maybe they are not part of the same club as the other politicians.
lifeisstillgood 9y ago
This is not the European government in the sense we understand normal government. In the USA the federal government is seen as the "real" one and the States are the also-rand. In Europe it's the other way round. MEPs are elected really as proxy popularity polls on the home parties. And they undergo very little scrutiny of their actions at home. It's only when EU runs counter to a home country "third rail" that it gets reported - for example changes to agricultural policy. this is its strength and weakness (if every road and job susbsidised by EU was branded with EU logo on the pay packet (1,045 euros this month came from EU!) then it probably would be looked on differently. The EU is mostly a positive boon for the world. But the lack of scrutiny leads to no system of checks and balances - which is not good in the long term. In tech policy there are either no home country policies entrenched, or the different sides are not deeply entrenched (Security agencies love spying on email of course but it's only a decade or two) So a sensible policy wonk can lay down really useful guidelines that help everyone. Because it so early in the game. Being a sensible policy wonk and trying to fix agricultural subsidies where there are centuries of ingrained compromises is much mich harder Trust me the UK gov is not down with this idea
- another-dave 9y ago
  > MEPs are elected really as proxy popularity polls on the home parties. And they undergo very little scrutiny of their actions at home. This is painfully true, and the biggest hurdle IMO to solving the perceived "democratic deficit" of the EU. MEPs should be banned from using domestic party branding on their material, and have to canvas themselves based on the bloc they plan to align to in the EU, and what that stands for. Only then do you have a hope of people educating themselves on which EU parties/blocs align with their own ideologies. At the moment, standing based on domestic parties in an EU parliament election has about as much relevance as someone in a general election saying "Vote Jones, member of the local football club", but leaving off their party affiliation.
  - beojan 9y ago
    > MEPs should be banned from using domestic party branding on their material, and have to canvas themselves based on the bloc they plan to align to in the EU, and what that stands for. MEPs align themselves with the bloc their party is aligned with. Perhaps it would be better if political parties had to include the branding of the European Parliament political group they're aligned with on all campaign materials (I'd go so far as to say this should also apply to national and local elections, if EU citizens can vote in them).
vog 9y ago
> Why is it that European governments seem to act in the interests of their citizens Note that this article is about the European Parliament, which indeed acts very often in the interests of us, the European citizens. However, that one is not the "European government". More precisely, it is only one part of it (depending on how strict you want to draw your analogy). This is really a pity! There should be more power to the European Parliament. On the other hand, if the European Parliament had more power, lobbyists would engage with it much more than they do now. So maybe it would then become as biased as all the national parliaments. However, I really hope that the European Parliament is able to retain its quality if it gets more power, which is why I'm a strong supporter of giving more power to the Parliament, and consequently taking power away from the Council and the Commission. While we are at it: If you haven't already done so, you should go and become a regular supporter EDRi. It is one of the very few civil rights organizations that act on European level (not just national level). They achieve astonishingly much, given their low budget. Imagine what they could achieve with a real budget! https://edri.org/ https://edri.org/
- gpvos 9y ago
  According to a comment[0] on earlier discussion[1], this legislative process was even initiated by the European Council and European Commission. I'm curious about more details about that, though. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14578358 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14578358 [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14577828 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14577828
  - vog 9y ago
    > this legislative process was even initiated by the European Council and European Commission This is no surpise. Note that the European Parliament is not allowed to initiate new laws, so any new law has to start at Council/Commission, almost by definition. (As I said: The European Parliament should get more power. Where else do you have a parliament with a missing right of law initiative? WTF?!) All they can do is trying to shape the law proposals by Council/Commission into a less hostile version. Sometimes they are even able to turn things around, but that works not very often.
jopsen 9y ago
Campaign financing as well as some form of representative democracy. Also note most European nations have dramatically reviewed the election systems many times over the years. I believe France is at its fourth constitution :) US and UK doesn't exactly have modern election systems, it works a bit better in the UK because it's smaller, but brexit still happened..
- beojan 9y ago
  No voting system would have yielded a different result in the EU referendum, it was a two option referendum.
  - ptaipale 9y ago
    Perhaps a "more modern" voting system is one where you have only one option. Such systems were "progressive" back in 1980's, remember.
  - DaiPlusPlus 9y ago
    I genuinely wonder what the result would have been if the options were 1: Explicit no-opinion, 2: EEA membership. 3: Complete exit, WTO rules. 4: Status quo. 5: Even greater EU federalism. I imagine the 3rd option (UKIP's favourite) would be the least popular and the EEA option "soft brexit" as the winner - which I feel better reflects voter sentiment... and voter ignorance: as EEA members still pay money to Brussels and are subject to regulation on goods and immigration. At least it would have made it clear to everyone in Whitehall that "hard brexit" was/is unconscienceable.
    - viridian 9y ago
      I'd actually bet the opposite. I think if you only gave people one vote, it's pretty much guaranteed that you'd see 3 then 2 for popularity. More options without introducing rank would be the greatest gift you could give UKIP, whereas you'd lose the majority of remain (ie #4) votes to the flanking opinions of #2 for those wanting greater independence, and #5 for people who are more EU aligned. Thinking that most leave voters would go #2 only makes sense if you are thinking of the vote in the context of right now, not a year ago, when everything was more politically charged. I'd actually bet that had you suggested this a year ago, the people on the remain side would be loudly objecting to it, rather than the other way around.
josefx 9y ago
Check the individual governments, the German government for example is all for end to end use of the Bundestrojaner. End to end encryption wont really interfere with them when they practically own the end points.
- majewsky 9y ago
  In fact, German parliament will be voting this week (at practically the last opportunity before the forthcoming election in September) to extend the usage of the Bundestrojaner (federal Trojan horse) from the terrorist threats that it was supposed to combat to all kinds of mundane offenses (e.g. drug abuse). Source (German): https://netzpolitik.org/2017/staatstrojaner-bundestag-beschliesst-diese-woche-das-krasseste-ueberwachungsgesetz-der-legislaturperiode/ https://netzpolitik.org/2017/staatstrojaner-bundestag-beschl... I expect that the law will be shot down by the Bundesverfassungsgericht (Germany's Supreme Court), but it will be a few years until that happens because these processes take time.
  - krylon 9y ago
    The blatant disregard for the Bundesverfassungsgericht some politicians show drives me mad when I think about it too long. They shot down the Bundestrojaner once already, and based on their reasoning about the matter (or what I remember of it), I am certain they will do so again.
rakoo 9y ago
To add to other answers, the european parliament is composed of deputies elected directly by european citizens, so it doesn't represent european governments; the latter are represented in the european council, composed of the different heads of state. I don't know what is the council position on this one but I expect it to be on the opposite side.
akerro 9y ago
Damn it! I dont know. recently they had a few good ideas there were discussed and some even implemented! Our system definitely is broken... but in a good way?
atemerev 9y ago
Because other governments' offensive capabilities are greater, and they want to improve their defenses first.
z3t4 9y ago
A theory is that not much money is poured into elections for who is sitting in the EU chairs, allowing small parties to gain votes.
jrimbault 9y ago
It's the European Parliament here, and there are much more protections between politics and businesses/lobbyists.
eeZah7Ux 9y ago
European cultures are heavily influenced by having seen dictatorships be born, grow and collapse. Don't worry, US and UK will get there.
- sigzero 9y ago
  Get where? The US is not going to join anything like a "EU".
  - zanny 9y ago
    He was referencing the US getting to experience dictatorial rule.
- digi_owl 9y ago
  UK has been there, multiple times no less...
  - vixen99 9y ago
    Reference? Which administrations have stuck to power irrespective of the wishes of the electorate?

Why is it that European governments seem to act in the interests of their citizens and just about all other governments default policy positions is to act against the interests of the citizens?

secfirstmd 9y ago

Parliamentary systems in general are more responsive than Presidential ones. Also, most of us EU nationals don't see EU structures as very democratically responsive. Fairly sure most of us only send the B Team to the EU parliament. E.g retired national politicians, or people who couldn't get elected for national parliaments. Also, it gets a lot less coverage than national parliaments, so members are free to vote on random things without the same amount of scrutiny.

forgottenacc57 9y ago
Other countries primary concern is to give big business and the rich anything they want.
jopsen 9y ago
Yeah, the EU works surprisingly well... I mean given how little attention it gets the EU institutions makes a lot of good calls. Granted, it would likely change it more controversial topics was handled by EU.
- krylon 9y ago
  OTOH, sometimes national governments will try establish policies at the EU level that they know will be unpopular at home, so can face their voters and claim they don't really want this, but look, that evil EU makes us. That was how the data retention laws were established before the European Court of Justice decided that it was illegal/unconstitutional (unsure what term to use here).
NetStrikeForce 9y ago
> most of us EU nationals don't see EU structures as very democratically responsive. Whilst I got the same feeling, this really needs to be backed up by data. Do you know any reliable polls about it?
- jrimbault 9y ago
  The recent elections (last year or so) in Europe showed a great deal of anti-EU feelings from some parts of the population.
  - NetStrikeForce 9y ago
    Op said "most of EU nationals". You say "a great deal" - but I can't really put that into numbers. "Most" means >51% but "a great deal" is just what I call (please don't get offense) bullshit-speak. I have asked for numbers and the elections in different European countries this and last year did not show majorities of anti-EU feelings. Netherlands, France, Austria, Spain, ... am I missing something? The fact is only Greece has a majority that dislikes the EU (I'd say for obvious reasons). Not even the UK is polling that way right now.
    - secfirstmd 9y ago
      Yes I think it's also about which part of the EU. The majority seem to support the EU as a whole but some of the political structures like the Parliament and Commission - less so. "Since 2012, there has been a steady increase in Parliament of the fight against terrorism and respect for individual freedoms as a priority policy for the European Parliament, and this is now in second place (42%, +8 compared with 2015). Meanwhile, some other indicators remain relatively unchanged. A clear majority of Europeans still believe that being a member of the European Union is a good thing (53%, -2), and that their country has benefitted from this membership (60%, =). Likewise, around seven respondents in ten think that there is more solidarity amongst Europeans than issues which separate them (71%, -3). Nearly one European in two also shares the opinion that a harmonised social welfare system reinforces their feeling of being a European citizen (46%, +1). We also noted that the neutral image which Europeans have of the European Parliament (44%, -2), and the more significant role which they want to see it play (46%, +2), are two indicators which also remain stable. In addition, Europeans remain well informed about the European Parliament. Finally, other results show a decline in this survey. For example, Europeans feel that their voice counts less and less, both at national and at European level. However, in 26 of the 28 Member States, they felt that their voice counts more in their own country (53% in average, -10 compared with 2015) than at EU level (37% in average, -2). When asked about the future situation, Europeans are increasingly pessimistic, both in the EU (54% « things are going in the wrong direction », +13 compared with 2015) and in their own country (58% « id. », +14), Among the various elements of European identity, a significant decline in the single currency as one of the essential elements is also noticeable (33%, -6), particularly in the Euro area." Source: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/atyourservice/en/20161110PVL00113/Parlemeter-2016 http://www.europarl.europa.eu/atyourservice/en/20161110PVL00...
jacquesm 9y ago
> Fairly sure most of us only send the B Team to the EU parliament. E.g retired national politicians, or people who couldn't get elected for national parliaments. I wouldn't call 'retired national politicians' the 'B' team, those are more likely the 'A' team, no longer worried about their career they are much freer to operate than their national counterparts, besides that they have lots of experience. A Dutch example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neelie_Kroes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neelie_Kroes
- barrkel 9y ago
  Neelie isn't an MEP. MEPs don't have much power, so ambitious people aren't interested, so the B team gets sent, and then nobody wants to give them much more responsibility.
  - smhg 9y ago
    Neelie was indeed not an example of a MEP (read different comments in parent-parent-parent's thread for distinction). But there are definitely examples of driven 'A' team politicians in the EP. And those are more easily heard because of the lack of attention to the laid back types. So the possible higher amount of the latter isn't even an all black-white bad thing. And since many are positive about the results of the EP: does it even matter?
- gambiting 9y ago
  The current president of the European Council, Donald Tusk, used to be the Polish Prime minister before he took the position in Brussels. Definitely not B team.
  - secfirstmd 9y ago
    Yes the European Council and European Commission tend to get the more experienced and capable former national politicians but the Parliament generally doesn't...Certainly not in the European countries that I have lived, worked and studied in/about.

devoply 9y ago

Maybe they are not part of the same club as the other politicians.

lifeisstillgood 9y ago

This is not the European government in the sense we understand normal government. In the USA the federal government is seen as the "real" one and the States are the also-rand. In Europe it's the other way round. MEPs are elected really as proxy popularity polls on the home parties. And they undergo very little scrutiny of their actions at home. It's only when EU runs counter to a home country "third rail" that it gets reported - for example changes to agricultural policy. this is its strength and weakness (if every road and job susbsidised by EU was branded with EU logo on the pay packet (1,045 euros this month came from EU!) then it probably would be looked on differently. The EU is mostly a positive boon for the world. But the lack of scrutiny leads to no system of checks and balances - which is not good in the long term. In tech policy there are either no home country policies entrenched, or the different sides are not deeply entrenched (Security agencies love spying on email of course but it's only a decade or two) So a sensible policy wonk can lay down really useful guidelines that help everyone. Because it so early in the game. Being a sensible policy wonk and trying to fix agricultural subsidies where there are centuries of ingrained compromises is much mich harder Trust me the UK gov is not down with this idea

another-dave 9y ago
> MEPs are elected really as proxy popularity polls on the home parties. And they undergo very little scrutiny of their actions at home. This is painfully true, and the biggest hurdle IMO to solving the perceived "democratic deficit" of the EU. MEPs should be banned from using domestic party branding on their material, and have to canvas themselves based on the bloc they plan to align to in the EU, and what that stands for. Only then do you have a hope of people educating themselves on which EU parties/blocs align with their own ideologies. At the moment, standing based on domestic parties in an EU parliament election has about as much relevance as someone in a general election saying "Vote Jones, member of the local football club", but leaving off their party affiliation.
- beojan 9y ago
  > MEPs should be banned from using domestic party branding on their material, and have to canvas themselves based on the bloc they plan to align to in the EU, and what that stands for. MEPs align themselves with the bloc their party is aligned with. Perhaps it would be better if political parties had to include the branding of the European Parliament political group they're aligned with on all campaign materials (I'd go so far as to say this should also apply to national and local elections, if EU citizens can vote in them).

vog 9y ago

> Why is it that European governments seem to act in the interests of their citizens Note that this article is about the European Parliament, which indeed acts very often in the interests of us, the European citizens. However, that one is not the "European government". More precisely, it is only one part of it (depending on how strict you want to draw your analogy). This is really a pity! There should be more power to the European Parliament. On the other hand, if the European Parliament had more power, lobbyists would engage with it much more than they do now. So maybe it would then become as biased as all the national parliaments. However, I really hope that the European Parliament is able to retain its quality if it gets more power, which is why I'm a strong supporter of giving more power to the Parliament, and consequently taking power away from the Council and the Commission. While we are at it: If you haven't already done so, you should go and become a regular supporter EDRi. It is one of the very few civil rights organizations that act on European level (not just national level). They achieve astonishingly much, given their low budget. Imagine what they could achieve with a real budget! https://edri.org/ https://edri.org/

gpvos 9y ago
According to a comment[0] on earlier discussion[1], this legislative process was even initiated by the European Council and European Commission. I'm curious about more details about that, though. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14578358 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14578358 [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14577828 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14577828
- vog 9y ago
  > this legislative process was even initiated by the European Council and European Commission This is no surpise. Note that the European Parliament is not allowed to initiate new laws, so any new law has to start at Council/Commission, almost by definition. (As I said: The European Parliament should get more power. Where else do you have a parliament with a missing right of law initiative? WTF?!) All they can do is trying to shape the law proposals by Council/Commission into a less hostile version. Sometimes they are even able to turn things around, but that works not very often.

jopsen 9y ago

Campaign financing as well as some form of representative democracy. Also note most European nations have dramatically reviewed the election systems many times over the years. I believe France is at its fourth constitution :) US and UK doesn't exactly have modern election systems, it works a bit better in the UK because it's smaller, but brexit still happened..

beojan 9y ago
No voting system would have yielded a different result in the EU referendum, it was a two option referendum.
- ptaipale 9y ago
  Perhaps a "more modern" voting system is one where you have only one option. Such systems were "progressive" back in 1980's, remember.
- DaiPlusPlus 9y ago
  I genuinely wonder what the result would have been if the options were 1: Explicit no-opinion, 2: EEA membership. 3: Complete exit, WTO rules. 4: Status quo. 5: Even greater EU federalism. I imagine the 3rd option (UKIP's favourite) would be the least popular and the EEA option "soft brexit" as the winner - which I feel better reflects voter sentiment... and voter ignorance: as EEA members still pay money to Brussels and are subject to regulation on goods and immigration. At least it would have made it clear to everyone in Whitehall that "hard brexit" was/is unconscienceable.
  - viridian 9y ago
    I'd actually bet the opposite. I think if you only gave people one vote, it's pretty much guaranteed that you'd see 3 then 2 for popularity. More options without introducing rank would be the greatest gift you could give UKIP, whereas you'd lose the majority of remain (ie #4) votes to the flanking opinions of #2 for those wanting greater independence, and #5 for people who are more EU aligned. Thinking that most leave voters would go #2 only makes sense if you are thinking of the vote in the context of right now, not a year ago, when everything was more politically charged. I'd actually bet that had you suggested this a year ago, the people on the remain side would be loudly objecting to it, rather than the other way around.

josefx 9y ago

Check the individual governments, the German government for example is all for end to end use of the Bundestrojaner. End to end encryption wont really interfere with them when they practically own the end points.

majewsky 9y ago
In fact, German parliament will be voting this week (at practically the last opportunity before the forthcoming election in September) to extend the usage of the Bundestrojaner (federal Trojan horse) from the terrorist threats that it was supposed to combat to all kinds of mundane offenses (e.g. drug abuse). Source (German): https://netzpolitik.org/2017/staatstrojaner-bundestag-beschliesst-diese-woche-das-krasseste-ueberwachungsgesetz-der-legislaturperiode/ https://netzpolitik.org/2017/staatstrojaner-bundestag-beschl... I expect that the law will be shot down by the Bundesverfassungsgericht (Germany's Supreme Court), but it will be a few years until that happens because these processes take time.
- krylon 9y ago
  The blatant disregard for the Bundesverfassungsgericht some politicians show drives me mad when I think about it too long. They shot down the Bundestrojaner once already, and based on their reasoning about the matter (or what I remember of it), I am certain they will do so again.

rakoo 9y ago

To add to other answers, the european parliament is composed of deputies elected directly by european citizens, so it doesn't represent european governments; the latter are represented in the european council, composed of the different heads of state. I don't know what is the council position on this one but I expect it to be on the opposite side.

akerro 9y ago

Damn it! I dont know. recently they had a few good ideas there were discussed and some even implemented! Our system definitely is broken... but in a good way?

atemerev 9y ago

Because other governments' offensive capabilities are greater, and they want to improve their defenses first.

z3t4 9y ago

A theory is that not much money is poured into elections for who is sitting in the EU chairs, allowing small parties to gain votes.

jrimbault 9y ago

It's the European Parliament here, and there are much more protections between politics and businesses/lobbyists.

eeZah7Ux 9y ago

European cultures are heavily influenced by having seen dictatorships be born, grow and collapse. Don't worry, US and UK will get there.

sigzero 9y ago
Get where? The US is not going to join anything like a "EU".
- zanny 9y ago
  He was referencing the US getting to experience dictatorial rule.
digi_owl 9y ago
UK has been there, multiple times no less...
- vixen99 9y ago
  Reference? Which administrations have stuck to power irrespective of the wishes of the electorate?