3 ms·
I see what you mean now, thank you. To me, the idea of heads of government each appointing a commissioner is completely in keeping with democratic norms, such
by dane-pgp 4y ago
I see what you mean now, thank you.
To me, the idea of heads of government each appointing a commissioner is completely in keeping with democratic norms, such as the way ambassadors are appointed to represent their country abroad and in organisations like the UN.
Similarly, many countries choose their judges by appointment rather than direct election, but perhaps a more relevant comparison is the idea of a senate where each state's legislature appoints one or more representatives to send to a federal or confederal body (as was the case in the US before the seventeenth amendment).
- Akronymus 4y agoI personally believe the more layers that get added ABOVE the highest elected office (in terms of who sets the rules to follow) that are unelected, the less democratic it is. Usually appointees and such have LESS power than the elected positions. (Sometimes not, with good reasons, eg. supreme court in the US) Obviously, there are good reasons to have unelected officials for some things. I believe the EU shouldn't be one of them.
- raxxorraxor 4y agoThe UN is not itself democratic, it just self-asserts democracy as one of its core values. But it very much does include leadership of countries that are not democracies. I think this is far too indirect to call it democratic, not only because of practical problems such as most people not even knowing the representatives of their own countries. The parliament isn't really independent in my opinion. It is the most democratic institution, but I think the EU needs delegation to clearly defined responsibilities. But the parliament would of course never vote for that. Nobody listens to the EU judiciary anyway. Just look at mass surveillance, Europe's police and intelligence agencies just operate outside of the law.