4 ms·

The people care infinitely more about "informational" memes about curvy bananas and conspiracy theories about Muslims and cultural marxism than about who picks

by FRex 9y ago

The people care infinitely more about "informational" memes about curvy bananas and conspiracy theories about Muslims and cultural marxism than about who picks who in some EU structure. At the same time even the slightest EU regulations are like communism and even the tiniest enforcement of EU law or solidarity is comparable to an armed invasion on the country's sovereignty. Cases in point are how before downing of MH17 in Ukraine Western European attitudes about sanctioning Russia were "not our problem" and "we would lose money" and how Eastern Europe fought tooth and nail against refugees because "Merkel invited them" and "all Muslims are rapists and terrorists". And to add insult to injury every time European Council or European Parliament does something dumb the EU is being called undemocratic. The democratic care deficit in people is not even EU specific. Turnaround is low all around in various elections and some people don't even know the name of the ruling party, prime minister, president, etc. in their own country. Maybe the EU should actually disband and let Germany steamroll us all yet again. Maybe then people would get it.

stale2002 9y ago
I think what these eastern European countries want is precisely for Germany to stay out of their business. Ex, on immigration policy is just one example. What is the solution that has germany completely leaving these countries alone, whether it is directly, or indirectly via the EU?
woodpanel 9y ago
While I agree, we would all be better off if the populace was more intelligent, I can't deny that this is a very narcissistic attitude. National elections carry vastly more importance for the people than EP elections, just look at the voter turnout statistics. And rightfully so. Just look at the daily news of Denmark, Netherlands or Germany. Countries that are compared to other sets of nations remarkably similar. Yet, languages aside, have vastly different daily concerns and thus vastly different needs. A parliament where your nations needs are watered down is guaranteed to offend your nations voters over each iteration where such offending decision takes place. The bigger the electorate, the lesser a vote counts, thus less participation and ultimately less democratic legitimacy.
- FRex 9y ago
  I absolutely disagree with everything here. Voting doesn't require extraordinary feats of intelligence or lots of time. Probably up to 99% of people in Europe are literate and not declared insane and thus able to vote. All it requires is an ounce of care and taking a slightly longer walk once every 5 years. Even if the chance of making a change is miniscule it should be a forgone conclusion. Almost every major party that starts in national elections also starts in European ones so the lowest effort vote is to just vote along your party line for whoever (which many/most people do for all elections already anyway). I will not ever buy the excuse that 60% of Europeans have not enough time to vote or took the high road and decided to not vote to not skew the results by their uninformed choice. It's a question of attitude towards EU and democracy itself more than it is a question of how much it truly matters. Poland is a unitary republic with directly elected president with strong veto power (which means that mismatch between president and parliament in political direction causes parliament to be more tame in bills it drafts). There was no two consecutive presidents from same political affiliation so far and only once there were two consecutive parliaments under the same party's government (PO-PSL coalition). This means that there is high chance to affect the outcome and that this outcome determines both the direction the country goes in and how strongly it goes in it. Despite that the turnout for both presidential and parliamentary elections was only around 50% (55% for second round in presidential elections). Due to few quirks of the rules and how close it was even half a million extra voters in right places could have affected the outcome significantly. Meanwhile in the federal German elections there was over 75% turnout this year despite the fact that German federal government is quite stable for the last 17 years (Merkel as chancellor) and being a federation every German has his Land government (that is infinitely more powerful and autonomous than a Województwo in Poland is) closer to him and his "daily concerns and needs". It's also not a question of only the how much effect the vote has because Poland's turnout in European elections is worse than it is for many smaller (dare I say - more pro-EU..) countries like Belgium, Luxembourg, etc. despite that fact that we get more MEPs than they do. Even more ironically, each Polish vote was stronger in its effect on EP composition than theirs due to that higher MEP number we get and low turnout we provide, i.e. 7.5 million Poles elected 51 MEPs at 24% turnout while 4 million Belgians elected 21 at 90% turnout. EU and its predecessors were also supposed to prevent wars (one of actually stated ECSC goals was to make a war between France and Germany literally impossible) and set long term strategic goals, not manage day-to-day lives of Europeans, that's what their municipalities should do for them.

by FRex 9y ago

stale2002 9y ago

I think what these eastern European countries want is precisely for Germany to stay out of their business. Ex, on immigration policy is just one example. What is the solution that has germany completely leaving these countries alone, whether it is directly, or indirectly via the EU?

woodpanel 9y ago

While I agree, we would all be better off if the populace was more intelligent, I can't deny that this is a very narcissistic attitude. National elections carry vastly more importance for the people than EP elections, just look at the voter turnout statistics. And rightfully so. Just look at the daily news of Denmark, Netherlands or Germany. Countries that are compared to other sets of nations remarkably similar. Yet, languages aside, have vastly different daily concerns and thus vastly different needs. A parliament where your nations needs are watered down is guaranteed to offend your nations voters over each iteration where such offending decision takes place. The bigger the electorate, the lesser a vote counts, thus less participation and ultimately less democratic legitimacy.

FRex 9y ago
I absolutely disagree with everything here. Voting doesn't require extraordinary feats of intelligence or lots of time. Probably up to 99% of people in Europe are literate and not declared insane and thus able to vote. All it requires is an ounce of care and taking a slightly longer walk once every 5 years. Even if the chance of making a change is miniscule it should be a forgone conclusion. Almost every major party that starts in national elections also starts in European ones so the lowest effort vote is to just vote along your party line for whoever (which many/most people do for all elections already anyway). I will not ever buy the excuse that 60% of Europeans have not enough time to vote or took the high road and decided to not vote to not skew the results by their uninformed choice. It's a question of attitude towards EU and democracy itself more than it is a question of how much it truly matters. Poland is a unitary republic with directly elected president with strong veto power (which means that mismatch between president and parliament in political direction causes parliament to be more tame in bills it drafts). There was no two consecutive presidents from same political affiliation so far and only once there were two consecutive parliaments under the same party's government (PO-PSL coalition). This means that there is high chance to affect the outcome and that this outcome determines both the direction the country goes in and how strongly it goes in it. Despite that the turnout for both presidential and parliamentary elections was only around 50% (55% for second round in presidential elections). Due to few quirks of the rules and how close it was even half a million extra voters in right places could have affected the outcome significantly. Meanwhile in the federal German elections there was over 75% turnout this year despite the fact that German federal government is quite stable for the last 17 years (Merkel as chancellor) and being a federation every German has his Land government (that is infinitely more powerful and autonomous than a Województwo in Poland is) closer to him and his "daily concerns and needs". It's also not a question of only the how much effect the vote has because Poland's turnout in European elections is worse than it is for many smaller (dare I say - more pro-EU..) countries like Belgium, Luxembourg, etc. despite that fact that we get more MEPs than they do. Even more ironically, each Polish vote was stronger in its effect on EP composition than theirs due to that higher MEP number we get and low turnout we provide, i.e. 7.5 million Poles elected 51 MEPs at 24% turnout while 4 million Belgians elected 21 at 90% turnout. EU and its predecessors were also supposed to prevent wars (one of actually stated ECSC goals was to make a war between France and Germany literally impossible) and set long term strategic goals, not manage day-to-day lives of Europeans, that's what their municipalities should do for them.