6 ms·

"do, it’s also why democracy is such a big thing" Voters of France and Netherlands strongly rejected the treaty upon which the EU derives is legitimacy. Refere

by jariel 6y ago

"do, it’s also why democracy is such a big thing" Voters of France and Netherlands strongly rejected the treaty upon which the EU derives is legitimacy. Referendums were cancelled elsewhere. Ursula von der Leyen did not receive any votes, she wasn't even part of the process, she was an unknown German figure until after the election, when she was plucked from obscurity by actors acting in total opacity, behind closed doors: "Here is your New Leader". I respect much of the commercial facility of the EU, but it's severely lacking in democracy. And while I think a lot of the intentions of the current system are reasonable, a lot of it is not ... and I'm super concerned that totally unelected and unaccountable elite are just going to be smashing their big hands into the economy, with the simplistic populist notions of 'American Economic Imperialism' and a kind of anti-American jealousy just under the surface. It'd be nice to see much more thoughtfulness here, but more importantly, mechanisms to improve European competitiveness.

avianlyric 6y ago
The EU democratic structure is complex, that for sure. But it's hardly undemocratic. The EU has always struggled to explain how it works, why it's structure works the way it does. But all the leaders in the EU are elected, just not always via direct elections. A process that actually isn't that unusual in the world. The US is actually a bit of an outlier, because they have direct elections for almost every position in government, with some slightly mixed results. The EU it's common for countries to select and organise their executive bodies via in-direct elections. For example in the UK our prime minister isn't directly elected, the general public didn't "choose" Boris Johnson. Instead the conservative party did, via its own methodology which it can change any time it does. The current byzantine system exists out of a need to somehow balance the power of the EU as a federal entity, against the sovereignty of the individual nations. With irony come from the fact that the "unelected" leader only exist because it give more power to leaders of the member states, and takes it away from the EU as an organisation independent of its member states and their elected governments.
- Silhouette 6y ago
  The EU democratic structure is complex, that for sure. But it's hardly undemocratic. I don't really want to start a rehash of the entire Brexit debate we had in the UK, but the EU does have a serious democratic deficit. Ask yourself this simple question: Can a citizen who is governed by the EU meaningfully influence who is doing that governing? In particular, can a large group of citizens affect who holds power within the EU and vote out those individuals they don't want, so any individual office holder has some degree of personal accountability to the electorate? It would take quite a leap to argue that the European Commission, which is where most of the real power still lies in practice, would meet any of those standards. It is debatable whether even the European Parliament does, though it is at least more directly affected by the public vote. For example in the UK our prime minister isn't directly elected, the general public didn't "choose" Boris Johnson. Instead the conservative party did, via its own methodology which it can change any time it does. Our arrangement here in the UK suffers from a similar problem of failing to faithfully represent the will of the electorate. FPTP is a deeply flawed voting system on purely mathematical grounds, and then the mechanics through which the PM and by extension the government come to power once MPs have been elected can be even more distorted. If you don't think it matters that many of our population have little influence over who occupies Number 10, I would respectfully remind you that one of the first things each new PM does is handwrite four letters that could literally cause the end of the world as we know it.
  - avianlyric 6y ago
    > Can a citizen who is governed by the EU meaningfully influence who is doing that governing? In particular, can a large group of citizens affect who holds power within the EU and vote out those individuals they don't want, so any individual office holder has some degree of personal accountability to the electorate? Erm yes. A large group of citizen can apply pressure to its local government to push for change in the EU, they can also to the same via MEP elections. You just need to remember that a "large group" need to be very large to be considered important relative to the EU 450 million citizens. The UK's total population only makes up 14% of the total EU population, what gives us the right to dictate terms over the remaining 86%? National governments pick the members of the European Commision, so if you're not happy with your European Commission representative, take it up with your national government. As for the member picked by other governments, well you wouldn't expect to have power over an MP that doesn't represent you. > It is debatable whether even the European Parliament does The European Parliament obviously does. The only reason why the UK keeps getting short changed by the European Parliament is because we keep electing idiots into power. Most because our national government like to pretend MEPs don't exist, thus doesn't educate people on the importance of MEP elections, then acts surprised when the European Parliament doesn't represent the UK population. > If you don't think it matters that many of our population have little influence over who occupies Number 10 I think it does matter, I think it matter quite a bit. But I'm not convinced that the general public is the best body to make that choice directly. The whole point of have a representatives is that they have the time and resources to educate themselves on the minutiae of state, and make better decisions than the general public. Not because they're smarter or better, but because they're better informed. My view on the EU debate in the UK has always boiled down to the fact the UK public has simply not bothered to engage with the democratic systems in the EU, so it's not a surprise that those systems don't represent us. The fix here was always for the UK to actually participate in the EU, not just strope, but that would require the UK national government to stop using the EU as it scapegoat for its own domestic failures. At least with Brexit the UK government won't be able to blame the EU for everything anymore, and we might actually get some competent leaders with a real vision for the UK.
pmontra 6y ago
The EU is currently based upon the Treaty of Lisbon [1] signed in 2007 after the referenda of 2005 for the new constitution (Spain yes, France and Netherlands nay) [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Lisbon https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Lisbon
- jariel 6y ago
  Yes, exactly. Nations gave away sovereign, constitutional powers literally after their populations boldly rejected the terms, in a fair and open democratic processes. Other European nations, verging on 'voting no' were denied the chance precisely because the EU apparatus knew what the outcome would be. There's basically no defence of that issue, and the patronizing arguments defending 'indirect' nature of democracy of the EU wear thin - voters have no material impact on the EU, which is how it was designed, very much on purpose. The limitation that MEPs have no ability to introduce legislation or frankly drive any of the real legislative process is by design. It's mesmerizing to watch legions of young people defend an undemocratic system that their ancestors literally fought for 2000 years to overcome, with literally millions dead. 'Reason' lasted only one generation, before ostensibly well meaning actors took away the rights of the plebes before their eyes, and convinced them that it was in their best interest. There is obvious need for reform, and if there was, I'll bet Norway and UK would be part of it, and possibly even Switzerland.
  - avianlyric 6y ago
    > ancestors literally fought for 2000 years to overcome, with literally millions dead. Not sure how good your history is. But the EU was built by an ancestors who were fed of fighting and dying by the millions in wars that did nothing to actually improve people lives. The whole purpose of the EU from day zero was to ensure lasting peace in Europe, and given there haven't been any domestic European wars since its creation, I would say it's been pretty successful.
    - jariel 6y ago
      "The whole purpose of the EU from day zero was to ensure lasting peace in Europe" ? You do realize the EU as a body politic is very recent? (Not sure how good your history is. ?) 1) Yes, major powers who have economically integrated tend not to fight, that's great. It's the same all over the world. The US doesn't fight Japan either. 2) Europe's true sovereign guarantor, the US and their Nuclear Umbrella, which is the other 1/2 of the equation. 'The EU' is long after the fact. Moreover - it's besides the point - as I articulated, the EU has fundamental flaws with respect to democracy that can't be addressed with any reasonable argument it seems. EU citizens have little to no influence over their body politic, because all the power is a few points indirection away from their reach. Europeans were told after the election who their anointed leader would be, what her political platform was, and what her vision for the EU was. Just consider why for a moment the EU doesn't require leaders to be publicly announced and vetted before elections? Wouldn't that be a highly rational, reasonable, and arguably necessary element for legitimate democracy? What were EU leaders thinking when they definitely decided that this would not be required? It's absurd. Many citizens saw it was absurd, voted against the Constitutional Treaty, and it was passed anyhow.
paddez 6y ago
> Ursula von der Leyen did not receive any votes She was nominated by the Council of Europe (comprised of the heads of state for each of the EU nations), and confirmed by the European Parliament (which represents the European electorate).
- corty 6y ago
  That is a very uncharitable and weak interpretation of the grandparent. For the parliamentary elections, the bigger parties agreed to try to fix democracy deficits by promising to elect a nominated candidate (Frans Timmmermans and Manfred Weber) as president of the commission depending on which block won in parliament. Yet, after the election, in a typical EU backroom deal, von der Leyen was elected. So it is quite fair to say that no constituent voted for her in any meaningful way. https://www.zeit.de/politik/ausland/2019-07/ursula-von-der-leyen-eu-kommissionspraesidentin-wahlsieg https://www.zeit.de/politik/ausland/2019-07/ursula-von-der-l...
  - TheOtherHobbes 6y ago
    The UK has exactly the same opacity. People vote for parties, and the winning party can replace its leader at any time. Voters have exactly zero input into who is chosen. That choice is down to the party hierarchy, with some token show-voting from party members once a shortlist has been selected.
    - jariel 6y ago
      This is not true, and the most recent election in the UK is strong evidence of this. UK voters know which parties they are voting for, their platforms, and their leaders, turnout is high, and there is general awareness of the issues. In mostly the same way in other 'good' EU nations. Parliament can fall if there's a lack of confidence in leadership, particularly on an important issue, in which case, there's an election. This happen with Johnson in the UK wherein there was an 'issue election' called and people were well aware of the issues. This was actually a pretty strong and democratic process: Johnson had not been elected, so he went to the polls and people had material, meaningful input. In proportional representation systems, leaders can change without elections as well (see: Sweden, Finland etc.) and it's not exactly perfect but it works well enough. The 'good' European nations have pretty good democracy at the national level. It's at the EU level that it's all Byzantine. Pun intended.
Xixi 6y ago
It's only opaque if you don't care enough to study the question. Ursula von der Leyen was chosen by the members of the European Council. The European Council, among other responsibilities, "decides on the EU's overall direction and political priorities", and "nominates and appoints candidates to certain high profile EU level roles, such as the ECB and the Commission". [1] If you have to know only one thing about the EU, it's that one: power lies in the hand of the European Council. The current members of the European Council are: Alexander De Croo for Belgium, Boyko Borisov for Bulgaria, Andrej Babiš for the Czech Republic, Mette Frederiksen for Denmark, Angela Merkel for Germany, Jüri Ratas for Estonia, Micheál Martin for Ireland, Kyriakos Mitsotakis for Greece, Pedro Sánchez for Spain, Emmanuel Macron for France, Andrej Plenković for Croatia, Giuseppe Conte for Italy, Nicos Anastasiades for Cyprus, Krišjānis Kariņš for Latvia, Gitanas Nausėda for Lithuania, Xavier Bettel for Luxembourg, Viktor Orbán for Hungary, Robert Abela for Malta, Mark Rutte for the Netherlands, Sebastian Kurz for Austria, Mateusz Morawiecki for Poland, António Costa for Portugal, Klaus Iohannis for Romania, Janez Janša for Slovenia, Igor Matovič for the Slovak Republic, Sanna Marin for Finland, and finally Stefan Löfven for Sweden. If you don't like the direction of the EU, ask your representant to do something about it. Otherwise pick another one. They are all democratically elected (directly, or indirectly in parliamentary systems). [1] https://europa.eu/european-union/about-eu/institutions-bodies/european-council_en https://europa.eu/european-union/about-eu/institutions-bodie...

by jariel 6y ago

avianlyric 6y ago

The EU democratic structure is complex, that for sure. But it's hardly undemocratic. The EU has always struggled to explain how it works, why it's structure works the way it does. But all the leaders in the EU are elected, just not always via direct elections. A process that actually isn't that unusual in the world. The US is actually a bit of an outlier, because they have direct elections for almost every position in government, with some slightly mixed results. The EU it's common for countries to select and organise their executive bodies via in-direct elections. For example in the UK our prime minister isn't directly elected, the general public didn't "choose" Boris Johnson. Instead the conservative party did, via its own methodology which it can change any time it does. The current byzantine system exists out of a need to somehow balance the power of the EU as a federal entity, against the sovereignty of the individual nations. With irony come from the fact that the "unelected" leader only exist because it give more power to leaders of the member states, and takes it away from the EU as an organisation independent of its member states and their elected governments.

Silhouette 6y ago
The EU democratic structure is complex, that for sure. But it's hardly undemocratic. I don't really want to start a rehash of the entire Brexit debate we had in the UK, but the EU does have a serious democratic deficit. Ask yourself this simple question: Can a citizen who is governed by the EU meaningfully influence who is doing that governing? In particular, can a large group of citizens affect who holds power within the EU and vote out those individuals they don't want, so any individual office holder has some degree of personal accountability to the electorate? It would take quite a leap to argue that the European Commission, which is where most of the real power still lies in practice, would meet any of those standards. It is debatable whether even the European Parliament does, though it is at least more directly affected by the public vote. For example in the UK our prime minister isn't directly elected, the general public didn't "choose" Boris Johnson. Instead the conservative party did, via its own methodology which it can change any time it does. Our arrangement here in the UK suffers from a similar problem of failing to faithfully represent the will of the electorate. FPTP is a deeply flawed voting system on purely mathematical grounds, and then the mechanics through which the PM and by extension the government come to power once MPs have been elected can be even more distorted. If you don't think it matters that many of our population have little influence over who occupies Number 10, I would respectfully remind you that one of the first things each new PM does is handwrite four letters that could literally cause the end of the world as we know it.
- avianlyric 6y ago
  > Can a citizen who is governed by the EU meaningfully influence who is doing that governing? In particular, can a large group of citizens affect who holds power within the EU and vote out those individuals they don't want, so any individual office holder has some degree of personal accountability to the electorate? Erm yes. A large group of citizen can apply pressure to its local government to push for change in the EU, they can also to the same via MEP elections. You just need to remember that a "large group" need to be very large to be considered important relative to the EU 450 million citizens. The UK's total population only makes up 14% of the total EU population, what gives us the right to dictate terms over the remaining 86%? National governments pick the members of the European Commision, so if you're not happy with your European Commission representative, take it up with your national government. As for the member picked by other governments, well you wouldn't expect to have power over an MP that doesn't represent you. > It is debatable whether even the European Parliament does The European Parliament obviously does. The only reason why the UK keeps getting short changed by the European Parliament is because we keep electing idiots into power. Most because our national government like to pretend MEPs don't exist, thus doesn't educate people on the importance of MEP elections, then acts surprised when the European Parliament doesn't represent the UK population. > If you don't think it matters that many of our population have little influence over who occupies Number 10 I think it does matter, I think it matter quite a bit. But I'm not convinced that the general public is the best body to make that choice directly. The whole point of have a representatives is that they have the time and resources to educate themselves on the minutiae of state, and make better decisions than the general public. Not because they're smarter or better, but because they're better informed. My view on the EU debate in the UK has always boiled down to the fact the UK public has simply not bothered to engage with the democratic systems in the EU, so it's not a surprise that those systems don't represent us. The fix here was always for the UK to actually participate in the EU, not just strope, but that would require the UK national government to stop using the EU as it scapegoat for its own domestic failures. At least with Brexit the UK government won't be able to blame the EU for everything anymore, and we might actually get some competent leaders with a real vision for the UK.

pmontra 6y ago

The EU is currently based upon the Treaty of Lisbon [1] signed in 2007 after the referenda of 2005 for the new constitution (Spain yes, France and Netherlands nay) [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Lisbon https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Lisbon

jariel 6y ago
Yes, exactly. Nations gave away sovereign, constitutional powers literally after their populations boldly rejected the terms, in a fair and open democratic processes. Other European nations, verging on 'voting no' were denied the chance precisely because the EU apparatus knew what the outcome would be. There's basically no defence of that issue, and the patronizing arguments defending 'indirect' nature of democracy of the EU wear thin - voters have no material impact on the EU, which is how it was designed, very much on purpose. The limitation that MEPs have no ability to introduce legislation or frankly drive any of the real legislative process is by design. It's mesmerizing to watch legions of young people defend an undemocratic system that their ancestors literally fought for 2000 years to overcome, with literally millions dead. 'Reason' lasted only one generation, before ostensibly well meaning actors took away the rights of the plebes before their eyes, and convinced them that it was in their best interest. There is obvious need for reform, and if there was, I'll bet Norway and UK would be part of it, and possibly even Switzerland.
- avianlyric 6y ago
  > ancestors literally fought for 2000 years to overcome, with literally millions dead. Not sure how good your history is. But the EU was built by an ancestors who were fed of fighting and dying by the millions in wars that did nothing to actually improve people lives. The whole purpose of the EU from day zero was to ensure lasting peace in Europe, and given there haven't been any domestic European wars since its creation, I would say it's been pretty successful.
  - jariel 6y ago
    "The whole purpose of the EU from day zero was to ensure lasting peace in Europe" ? You do realize the EU as a body politic is very recent? (Not sure how good your history is. ?) 1) Yes, major powers who have economically integrated tend not to fight, that's great. It's the same all over the world. The US doesn't fight Japan either. 2) Europe's true sovereign guarantor, the US and their Nuclear Umbrella, which is the other 1/2 of the equation. 'The EU' is long after the fact. Moreover - it's besides the point - as I articulated, the EU has fundamental flaws with respect to democracy that can't be addressed with any reasonable argument it seems. EU citizens have little to no influence over their body politic, because all the power is a few points indirection away from their reach. Europeans were told after the election who their anointed leader would be, what her political platform was, and what her vision for the EU was. Just consider why for a moment the EU doesn't require leaders to be publicly announced and vetted before elections? Wouldn't that be a highly rational, reasonable, and arguably necessary element for legitimate democracy? What were EU leaders thinking when they definitely decided that this would not be required? It's absurd. Many citizens saw it was absurd, voted against the Constitutional Treaty, and it was passed anyhow.

paddez 6y ago

> Ursula von der Leyen did not receive any votes She was nominated by the Council of Europe (comprised of the heads of state for each of the EU nations), and confirmed by the European Parliament (which represents the European electorate).

corty 6y ago
That is a very uncharitable and weak interpretation of the grandparent. For the parliamentary elections, the bigger parties agreed to try to fix democracy deficits by promising to elect a nominated candidate (Frans Timmmermans and Manfred Weber) as president of the commission depending on which block won in parliament. Yet, after the election, in a typical EU backroom deal, von der Leyen was elected. So it is quite fair to say that no constituent voted for her in any meaningful way. https://www.zeit.de/politik/ausland/2019-07/ursula-von-der-leyen-eu-kommissionspraesidentin-wahlsieg https://www.zeit.de/politik/ausland/2019-07/ursula-von-der-l...
- TheOtherHobbes 6y ago
  The UK has exactly the same opacity. People vote for parties, and the winning party can replace its leader at any time. Voters have exactly zero input into who is chosen. That choice is down to the party hierarchy, with some token show-voting from party members once a shortlist has been selected.
  - jariel 6y ago
    This is not true, and the most recent election in the UK is strong evidence of this. UK voters know which parties they are voting for, their platforms, and their leaders, turnout is high, and there is general awareness of the issues. In mostly the same way in other 'good' EU nations. Parliament can fall if there's a lack of confidence in leadership, particularly on an important issue, in which case, there's an election. This happen with Johnson in the UK wherein there was an 'issue election' called and people were well aware of the issues. This was actually a pretty strong and democratic process: Johnson had not been elected, so he went to the polls and people had material, meaningful input. In proportional representation systems, leaders can change without elections as well (see: Sweden, Finland etc.) and it's not exactly perfect but it works well enough. The 'good' European nations have pretty good democracy at the national level. It's at the EU level that it's all Byzantine. Pun intended.

Xixi 6y ago

It's only opaque if you don't care enough to study the question. Ursula von der Leyen was chosen by the members of the European Council. The European Council, among other responsibilities, "decides on the EU's overall direction and political priorities", and "nominates and appoints candidates to certain high profile EU level roles, such as the ECB and the Commission". [1] If you have to know only one thing about the EU, it's that one: power lies in the hand of the European Council. The current members of the European Council are: Alexander De Croo for Belgium, Boyko Borisov for Bulgaria, Andrej Babiš for the Czech Republic, Mette Frederiksen for Denmark, Angela Merkel for Germany, Jüri Ratas for Estonia, Micheál Martin for Ireland, Kyriakos Mitsotakis for Greece, Pedro Sánchez for Spain, Emmanuel Macron for France, Andrej Plenković for Croatia, Giuseppe Conte for Italy, Nicos Anastasiades for Cyprus, Krišjānis Kariņš for Latvia, Gitanas Nausėda for Lithuania, Xavier Bettel for Luxembourg, Viktor Orbán for Hungary, Robert Abela for Malta, Mark Rutte for the Netherlands, Sebastian Kurz for Austria, Mateusz Morawiecki for Poland, António Costa for Portugal, Klaus Iohannis for Romania, Janez Janša for Slovenia, Igor Matovič for the Slovak Republic, Sanna Marin for Finland, and finally Stefan Löfven for Sweden. If you don't like the direction of the EU, ask your representant to do something about it. Otherwise pick another one. They are all democratically elected (directly, or indirectly in parliamentary systems). [1] https://europa.eu/european-union/about-eu/institutions-bodies/european-council_en https://europa.eu/european-union/about-eu/institutions-bodie...