2 ms·

There's a lot of negotiations behind closed doors where we don't know how decisions are made. E.g. how the EC is formed. EU is run in authoritarian ways, but s

by mantas 3y ago

There's a lot of negotiations behind closed doors where we don't know how decisions are made. E.g. how the EC is formed. EU is run in authoritarian ways, but so far it's in, let's say, benevolent dictator mode. But same mechanism can be easily abused. And it's already abused. Just in ways that don't affect day-to-day life too much. But overall it's very bad for the society which does not feel attached to decisions of it's servants. Which is the bad thing. Democracies can easily cause a lot of harm (e.g. wars, repressions etc) too. But authocracies ruin societies for a loooong time. Wether they spilled blood or not.

hef19898 3y ago
EU lobbying isn't any worse than other political lobbying, both of which are bad. What the EU does so, is managing to get 27 nations to work on compromises. And it does so quite well, sometimes better and sometimes not. That, obviously, involves a ton of politics (humanity hasn't figured out a different approach yet, heck, even the most authoritarian and absolutists governments had tons of politics). The core fact remains so: all participants in EU governance are either elected directly at EU or national level or nominated by those elected parties.
- mantas 3y ago
  It’s not about lobbying. And it’s far past managing sovereign nations to compromise. Modern EU is a beast of its own and its own interests. Which so far is power grab from member states. And trying to push through infamous laws. Such as chat surveillance. The core fact is that EU governance is far removed from the people. It’s too huge and too diverse. But it’s perfect ground for deep state (deep union?) to find ways to work around democratic instruments.
  - seec 3y ago
    Yep, and that's even before mentioning the absurd cost it has for the little real benefits the citizen truly experience. I don't know about the poorer countries in EU, maybe they get net positive benefits; but as far as I can tell, for a country like France, you only get less efficient use of the taxation money, and the outcome are generally disconnected so not necessarily well spent. There is a lot of propaganda around what EU is paying for or allowing. But the truth is that each country would be able to do the exact same thing if they wanted to, just with better money efficiency because it wouldn't have to be cut so much for feeding the bureaucracy monster of the EU...
    - mantas 3y ago
      Same here re propaganda. The only difference is we get a lot of your tax money to listen to that propaganda :) But as we catch up economically, we'll get less and less euromonies. And yes, it's terribly inefficient too. The only thing it's efficient at is building a class of people who rely on EU institutions for their wellbeing. Collaborator class if I may?
      - seec 3y ago
        Yes, collaborator is a nice way to put it. I have had the (dis)pleasure of spending a bit of time near Brussels with some people that do "work" tightly related/linked to EU stuff. This is EXACTLY what it feels like; and in most cases it was pretty clear to me that those people cost more money to society than any kind of "value" they were bringing. But the whole thing is politics anyway, so outcomes are kinda irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. To me it looks like a prototype of some sort of new communist system, where the "leaders" choices are completely disconnected from the rest of the population...

by mantas 3y ago

hef19898 3y ago

EU lobbying isn't any worse than other political lobbying, both of which are bad. What the EU does so, is managing to get 27 nations to work on compromises. And it does so quite well, sometimes better and sometimes not. That, obviously, involves a ton of politics (humanity hasn't figured out a different approach yet, heck, even the most authoritarian and absolutists governments had tons of politics). The core fact remains so: all participants in EU governance are either elected directly at EU or national level or nominated by those elected parties.

mantas 3y ago
It’s not about lobbying. And it’s far past managing sovereign nations to compromise. Modern EU is a beast of its own and its own interests. Which so far is power grab from member states. And trying to push through infamous laws. Such as chat surveillance. The core fact is that EU governance is far removed from the people. It’s too huge and too diverse. But it’s perfect ground for deep state (deep union?) to find ways to work around democratic instruments.
- seec 3y ago
  Yep, and that's even before mentioning the absurd cost it has for the little real benefits the citizen truly experience. I don't know about the poorer countries in EU, maybe they get net positive benefits; but as far as I can tell, for a country like France, you only get less efficient use of the taxation money, and the outcome are generally disconnected so not necessarily well spent. There is a lot of propaganda around what EU is paying for or allowing. But the truth is that each country would be able to do the exact same thing if they wanted to, just with better money efficiency because it wouldn't have to be cut so much for feeding the bureaucracy monster of the EU...
  - mantas 3y ago
    Same here re propaganda. The only difference is we get a lot of your tax money to listen to that propaganda :) But as we catch up economically, we'll get less and less euromonies. And yes, it's terribly inefficient too. The only thing it's efficient at is building a class of people who rely on EU institutions for their wellbeing. Collaborator class if I may?
    - seec 3y ago
      Yes, collaborator is a nice way to put it. I have had the (dis)pleasure of spending a bit of time near Brussels with some people that do "work" tightly related/linked to EU stuff. This is EXACTLY what it feels like; and in most cases it was pretty clear to me that those people cost more money to society than any kind of "value" they were bringing. But the whole thing is politics anyway, so outcomes are kinda irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. To me it looks like a prototype of some sort of new communist system, where the "leaders" choices are completely disconnected from the rest of the population...