5 ms·

This is of course a process, that does not lend itself to be democratic, because it is way longer than most people's attention span. People don't manage to reme

This is of course a process, that does not lend itself to be democratic, because it is way longer than most people's attention span. People don't manage to remember things that happened in politics 4 years ago in their own country. Now they are required to follow up on dozens of shitty proposals, all probably illegal in their own country, and those don't even happen in their own country? That divides the number of people, who even start looking into this stuff by a factor of 1000 or so.

mejutoco 11mo ago
Is there a website that tracks these? That would be a nice divulgation process.
- rbehrends 11mo ago
  There is the Parliament's legislative train website [1]. However, it only tracks actual legislative steps, not the intra-Council negotiations, so the proposal's page appears to be have been largely inactive since 2024 [2]. [1] https://www.europarl.europa.eu/legislative-train/ https://www.europarl.europa.eu/legislative-train/ [2] https://www.europarl.europa.eu/legislative-train/theme-a-new-era-for-european-defence-and-security/file-combating-child-sexual-abuse-online https://www.europarl.europa.eu/legislative-train/theme-a-new...
basisword 11mo ago
>> that does not lend itself to be democratic, because it is way longer than most people's attention span The attention span of the general public _shouldn't_ matter. That's why we elect politicians.
- forgetfulness 11mo ago
  That could still be democratic in principle if it weren’t for lobbyists If legislative processes are so drawn out and complex that no more than a handful of ordinary citizens could keep track of them, the advantage that paid lobbyists have over the public is enormous
  - saubeidl 11mo ago
    That's where Unions and NGOs come in. Their job is to be lobbyists for the people, against corporate power.
- graemep 11mo ago
  > The attention span of the general public _shouldn't_ matter. That's why we elect politicians. It would work if we could elect politicians who were both competent and trustworthy. Of course that would require successfully electing people who are competent about a broad range of issues, able to see through well funded and clever lobbying, unblinded by ideology, and able to resist pressure.
- Xelbair 11mo ago
  Is the process democratic if citizen's opinions are irrelevant? No matter who's in charge, no matter the election results, no matter the protests - the same style of legislation is pushed. and once something's in it is almost impossible to remove.
  - iso1631 11mo ago
    That describes pretty much every democratic government in the world, from the USA to New Zealand
scrollaway 11mo ago
People’s attention span has decreased to a matter of days now, if not hours. Have you seen how quickly front page news in the US is forgotten? The democratic process needs a revamp but it shouldn’t be driven by the general populations attention span.
- ahsillyme 11mo ago
  I wouldn't be so sure of that assertion regarding attention span. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pluralistic_ignorance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pluralistic_ignorance granted, it's about opinion rather than capability but the same bias would explain such a reflexive judgment, and such a judgment will have negative consequences if it is false. (Consensus can be shaped, as can the perception of consensus be.)
squigz 11mo ago
People on average are really not that stupid and are absolutely capable of looking back a few years for context.
- DangitBobby 11mo ago
  We clearly live in different worlds.
  - squigz 11mo ago
    Maybe that says more about your biases than it does about the intelligence of 8 billion people though.
    - DangitBobby 11mo ago
      I'm not sure what factual basis you have for your optimism. I have plenty for my pessimism about human nature and our ability to competently govern ourselves as well as our general moral fortitude. We've gotten this far because we've been playing life on easy mode with a ridiculously nurturing planet and practically unlimited energy available under the ground, but we aren't smart enough or forward thinking enough to take on the minor pain necessary to avoid the catastrophe we are lumbering towards. We are short-sighted, selfish, self-important, and we haven't earned the regard in which we hold ourselves. Regarding your specific point about using recent context to inform political opinions, if you spend any amount of time listening to the opinions of people online you'll find that not only do they fail to accurately recall past events, but they don't bother to research what actually happened, and when they do they fail at anything but the most superficial political analysis.
      - squigz 11mo ago
        > We've gotten this far because we've been playing life on easy mode with a ridiculously nurturing planet and practically unlimited energy available under the ground, but we aren't smart enough or forward thinking enough to take on the minor pain necessary to avoid the catastrophe we are lumbering towards. We are short-sighted, selfish, self-important, and we haven't earned the regard in which we hold ourselves. Where's your "factual basis" for such assertions? > Regarding your specific point about using recent context to inform political opinions, if you spend any amount of time listening to the opinions of people online you'll find that not only do they fail to accurately recall past events, but they don't bother to research what actually happened, and when they do they fail at anything but the most superficial political analysis. 1) People regularly online are a rather specific group 2) People sharing their opinions online are a very specific group 3) Basing your views on society at large on opinions of those groups is a risky strategy, especially given how easy it has become to spread propaganda online Anyway as for my optimism, it's based on actually interacting with people directly. Having discussions with them. Talking to them about what they believe, and why. They're usually a lot more complex and intelligent than those various descriptors used above.
GeoAtreides 11mo ago
what do you mean, a slow bureaucracy is a democratic bureaucracy. the last thing you want is a highly efficient bureaucracy enacting change quickly. This message brought to you by the Bureau of Sabotage
- ekianjo 11mo ago
  There is nothing democratic about the process. It's all unelected politicians ruling for you
  - GeoAtreides 11mo ago
    I was making a joke (and referencing a book); that being said, you're wrong, no unelected politicians are ruling for me or any other european citizen.
    - Am4TIfIsER0ppos 11mo ago
      Which politicians ran on a platform of "we are going to spy on you"? I guess all of them do.
      - wongarsu 11mo ago
        "unelected politicians" and "politicians that do things outside their campaign promises" are very different claims
  - iso1631 11mo ago
    Which ones are unelected - the democratically elected heads of the member state governments? Or the democratically elected members of the EU parliament? Or the commissioners that are appointed by the democratically elected heads of the member state governments?
    - surgical_fire 11mo ago
      I tried the same questions on multiple different threads, to multiple different imbeciles posting the same bullshit. You will never get an answer from them. But we should keep asking it anyway. I always wondered if they live on the EU and are genuinely too stupid to understand how the bloc their country joined works or, most likely, live outside of it and the idea of the EU as a political entity offends their sensibilities or heighten their anxiety.

mejutoco 11mo ago

Is there a website that tracks these? That would be a nice divulgation process.

rbehrends 11mo ago
There is the Parliament's legislative train website [1]. However, it only tracks actual legislative steps, not the intra-Council negotiations, so the proposal's page appears to be have been largely inactive since 2024 [2]. [1] https://www.europarl.europa.eu/legislative-train/ https://www.europarl.europa.eu/legislative-train/ [2] https://www.europarl.europa.eu/legislative-train/theme-a-new-era-for-european-defence-and-security/file-combating-child-sexual-abuse-online https://www.europarl.europa.eu/legislative-train/theme-a-new...

basisword 11mo ago

>> that does not lend itself to be democratic, because it is way longer than most people's attention span The attention span of the general public _shouldn't_ matter. That's why we elect politicians.

forgetfulness 11mo ago
That could still be democratic in principle if it weren’t for lobbyists If legislative processes are so drawn out and complex that no more than a handful of ordinary citizens could keep track of them, the advantage that paid lobbyists have over the public is enormous
- saubeidl 11mo ago
  That's where Unions and NGOs come in. Their job is to be lobbyists for the people, against corporate power.
graemep 11mo ago
> The attention span of the general public _shouldn't_ matter. That's why we elect politicians. It would work if we could elect politicians who were both competent and trustworthy. Of course that would require successfully electing people who are competent about a broad range of issues, able to see through well funded and clever lobbying, unblinded by ideology, and able to resist pressure.
Xelbair 11mo ago
Is the process democratic if citizen's opinions are irrelevant? No matter who's in charge, no matter the election results, no matter the protests - the same style of legislation is pushed. and once something's in it is almost impossible to remove.
- iso1631 11mo ago
  That describes pretty much every democratic government in the world, from the USA to New Zealand

scrollaway 11mo ago

People’s attention span has decreased to a matter of days now, if not hours. Have you seen how quickly front page news in the US is forgotten? The democratic process needs a revamp but it shouldn’t be driven by the general populations attention span.

ahsillyme 11mo ago
I wouldn't be so sure of that assertion regarding attention span. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pluralistic_ignorance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pluralistic_ignorance granted, it's about opinion rather than capability but the same bias would explain such a reflexive judgment, and such a judgment will have negative consequences if it is false. (Consensus can be shaped, as can the perception of consensus be.)

squigz 11mo ago

People on average are really not that stupid and are absolutely capable of looking back a few years for context.

DangitBobby 11mo ago
We clearly live in different worlds.
- squigz 11mo ago
  Maybe that says more about your biases than it does about the intelligence of 8 billion people though.
  - DangitBobby 11mo ago
    I'm not sure what factual basis you have for your optimism. I have plenty for my pessimism about human nature and our ability to competently govern ourselves as well as our general moral fortitude. We've gotten this far because we've been playing life on easy mode with a ridiculously nurturing planet and practically unlimited energy available under the ground, but we aren't smart enough or forward thinking enough to take on the minor pain necessary to avoid the catastrophe we are lumbering towards. We are short-sighted, selfish, self-important, and we haven't earned the regard in which we hold ourselves. Regarding your specific point about using recent context to inform political opinions, if you spend any amount of time listening to the opinions of people online you'll find that not only do they fail to accurately recall past events, but they don't bother to research what actually happened, and when they do they fail at anything but the most superficial political analysis.
    - squigz 11mo ago
      > We've gotten this far because we've been playing life on easy mode with a ridiculously nurturing planet and practically unlimited energy available under the ground, but we aren't smart enough or forward thinking enough to take on the minor pain necessary to avoid the catastrophe we are lumbering towards. We are short-sighted, selfish, self-important, and we haven't earned the regard in which we hold ourselves. Where's your "factual basis" for such assertions? > Regarding your specific point about using recent context to inform political opinions, if you spend any amount of time listening to the opinions of people online you'll find that not only do they fail to accurately recall past events, but they don't bother to research what actually happened, and when they do they fail at anything but the most superficial political analysis. 1) People regularly online are a rather specific group 2) People sharing their opinions online are a very specific group 3) Basing your views on society at large on opinions of those groups is a risky strategy, especially given how easy it has become to spread propaganda online Anyway as for my optimism, it's based on actually interacting with people directly. Having discussions with them. Talking to them about what they believe, and why. They're usually a lot more complex and intelligent than those various descriptors used above.

GeoAtreides 11mo ago

what do you mean, a slow bureaucracy is a democratic bureaucracy. the last thing you want is a highly efficient bureaucracy enacting change quickly. This message brought to you by the Bureau of Sabotage

ekianjo 11mo ago
There is nothing democratic about the process. It's all unelected politicians ruling for you
- GeoAtreides 11mo ago
  I was making a joke (and referencing a book); that being said, you're wrong, no unelected politicians are ruling for me or any other european citizen.
  - Am4TIfIsER0ppos 11mo ago
    Which politicians ran on a platform of "we are going to spy on you"? I guess all of them do.
    - wongarsu 11mo ago
      "unelected politicians" and "politicians that do things outside their campaign promises" are very different claims
- iso1631 11mo ago
  Which ones are unelected - the democratically elected heads of the member state governments? Or the democratically elected members of the EU parliament? Or the commissioners that are appointed by the democratically elected heads of the member state governments?
  - surgical_fire 11mo ago
    I tried the same questions on multiple different threads, to multiple different imbeciles posting the same bullshit. You will never get an answer from them. But we should keep asking it anyway. I always wondered if they live on the EU and are genuinely too stupid to understand how the bloc their country joined works or, most likely, live outside of it and the idea of the EU as a political entity offends their sensibilities or heighten their anxiety.