4 ms·
Really not a fan of the EU as a speech arbiter, especially considering that they are one of the biggest spenders of political ads on facebook in most european c
by seydor 3y ago
Really not a fan of the EU as a speech arbiter, especially considering that they are one of the biggest spenders of political ads on facebook in most european countries: https://www.facebook.com/ads/library/report/ https://www.facebook.com/ads/library/report/
unchecked power is dangerous
- lm28469 3y ago"You criticise society yet you live in it" type of vibe from this comment
- vetinari 3y agoThat's kind of a point, no? I want the society where I live to get better. Other societies have their own citizens, it's their job to improve theirs.
- lm28469 3y agoI fail to see how the EU advertising on Facebook demonstrates why the EU should not be allowed to enforce laws in its border. They can both use the system and be critical of it
- pydry 3y agoAre you more or less of fan of Elon Musk/[ insert billionaire here] taking that job instead?
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- layer8 3y agoThe EU has separation of powers. I don’t see the European Commission (who opened the present proceedings) listed as an advertiser under your link. And ultimately it is the judicial branch who will decide.
- seydor 3y agoIf for example you change the country to Spain you can see both the european commission and european parliament among the top spenders: https://i.imgur.com/TjzlrV5.png https://i.imgur.com/TjzlrV5.png Also i don't understand what you mean by 'judicial power'. The EU is not a state, it doesn't have judicial power and the legislative is shared between EC and EP
- layer8 3y agoI’m referring to the EU Court of Justice.
- seydor 3y agowhich has mainly an advisory role
- snowpid 3y agoNope. That's wrong.
- rsynnott 3y agoYou… may be thinking of the ECHR (not an EU body), though even describing that as advisory would be a major over-simplification. But for the ECJ, you’re just flat-out incorrect.
- seydor 3y agoCalling the ECJ a "judicial branch" is also an extreme stretch. The ECJ can't enforce a law, that is up to each country's national system to do. It can only decide if asked by a national court or in matters of union law. There is no clear separation of powers in EU because EU is a treaty, not a state. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Court_of_Justice https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Court_of_Justice
- arlort 3y ago> The EU is not a state You're right but > it doesn't have judicial power This is wrong > legislative is shared between EC and EP And the Council
- camillomiller 3y agoLOL, do you really wanna talk about unchecked power by defending an Elon Musk company?
- Longhanks 3y agoThe point stands no matter the accused.
- alkonaut 3y agoWhat is "unchecked" refering to here? Isn't the EU more a "checked" power than (say) the owner of the platform in question is?
- ath3nd 3y agoYes, because EU leaders of state are elected democratically.
- alkonaut 3y agoAnd so is the EU parliament.
- seydor 3y agothierry breton, ursula Vdl, and any of the commissionaires are not elected democratically, unless you consider the internal brussels lobbying some sort of democracy. at best it s a detached aristocracy by that logic, elon's stock prices and tesla sales are an even more direct form of check for his power.
- alkonaut 3y agoUrsula Von Der Leyen was appointed by the EU national leaders and elected by the EU parliament (which is elected by EU voters). It's as "democratically elected" as any minister in any democratic government: the people elect those that appoint the person. The same applies for EU commissioners. Yes it becomes second- or third hand democracy (the EU parliamentarians are usually appointed by their domestic parties, the appointments for commissioners are appointed by other politicians and so on). But such is representative democracy. At the end of the day it's the elected members of the parliament that vote on all positions, and all laws.
- nvm0n2 3y agoIt is tiresome how people promote this propaganda. > Ursula Von Der Leyen was appointed by the EU national leaders and elected by the EU parliament She was "elected" by the EP in a vote in which she was the only allowed candidate and still nearly lost because so many of the MEPs refused to vote in digust. Sorry, but an election in which there's only one option is not an election, that's an abuse of the word. And the Parliament is itself not a real Parliament. It has no actual powers of any use, so the people who run for it can't have policies. They rubber stamp what the Commission wants to do, they cannot override or control it. Just like the "election" of von der Leyen, this is a sinister abuse of terminology: it is an abuse of the word Parliament. Finally, we actually have no idea how von der Leyen got her job. She is the most powerful person in Europe and nobody can answer basic questions about how that happened. Yes, the leaders of the member states went into a room, and when they came out vdL was in charge. What was discussed in that room? Who were the other candidates? Were they any? If not, why not? Was there a vote? By which criteria was she judged? Did every country's leader even get a chance to speak at all? Were they threatened? (The EU threatens members routinely so it is not unthinkable). The truth is nobody knows the answer to any of these things because despite the EU being supposedly democratic, the people who are theoretically in charge are all sworn to secrecy. (by whom?! that's also a secret!) This is an absolute joke. Europeans should all be collectively ashamed of what a pathetically totalitarian system they have allowed their ruling classes to construct, and then they should work tirelessly towards its abolition.