3 ms·

All the quotes are clearly talking about closer integration which no one is hiding is a stated goal of the European Union. It's right there in the original trea

All the quotes are clearly talking about closer integration which no one is hiding is a stated goal of the European Union. It's right there in the original treaties `an ever closer union`. If you don't like it leave, but the rest have all committed to that a long time ago. The chat control thing has nothing to do with all of the above, it's just a bit of legislation. The whole "we will vote on it again and again until we can finally push it through on the 12th of August at 03:00 o'clock with a total of 20 votes" is a typical strategy seen in many democracies pushed by vested interests on unpopular legislation. It's not the "EU" that wants this to pass, there are specific people and groups pushing for this surveillance state apparatchiks, all sort of compliance industry vultures, and all the censorship technology industry that is dying to enter the chat market. I really doubt von der Leyen or anyone in a position of actual power actually cares about this, I am certain they really think this is small time inconsequential bullshit. They have much larger problems to deal with, like the looming jet and diesel shortage, the upcoming crop shortfall we are going to see come harvest season, getting Mercosur through, planning for when Trump inevitably invades Cuba or puts Greenland back on the menu.

raxxorraxor 4mo ago
No, people didn't commit to it. That is pretty much the core of the criticism. It will never be a federation and while economic integration is worthwhile, it should be reduced to very clear boundaries.
joe_mamba 4mo ago
>All the quotes are clearly talking about closer integration Are you saying "the ends justify the means" of this "closer integration"? With that logic, Hitler's end goal was also closer integration of Europe's countries once he conquered them all. >If you don't like it leave Impossible to leave now when you joined 20+ years ago, when the EU was something completely different, which now grew beyond what you signed up for, without fucking your economy. It's called a rug pull with a dead man's switch. Try to leave and we make sure we all blow up. >They have much larger problems to deal with, like [...] planning for when Trump inevitably invades Cuba Why is Cuba a bigger issue for Ursula than what's happening in the EU? LAst time I checked Cuba is on a different continent and an insignificant trading partner of the EU.
- vrganj 4mo ago
  > Impossible to leave now when you joined 20+ years ago, when the EU was something completely different, which now grew beyond what you signed up for, without fucking your economy. It's called a rug pull with a dead man's switch. Try to leave and we make sure we all blow up. The EU was always designed to be an "ever closer union". It's literally in the Treaty of Rome from 1957 (!). This is explicitly what was signed up for. It's going a bit slow, unfortunately, but it is the core point. There's no rug being pulled. This was always the goal. It is specifically what everyone signed on to.
  - joe_mamba 4mo ago
    >The EU was always designed to be an "ever closer union". Wow, isn't it convenient that such a vague all-encompassing paper from the past that you never voted for, can be used a justification for anything being done to you today? What are the boundaries for that "ever closer union"? At which point it it just close enough? Or is it open ended? Would you sign an open ended contract with the bank? That wouldn't be legal. >It's literally in the Treaty of Rome from 1957 (!) How many Europeans alive today voted for that in 1957? Were they aware when they signed it of what it would lead to or were they duped into signing something so vague and all-encompassing that will be used to do anything against them in the future? >This is explicitly what was signed up for. That's the problem, it's vague and not explicit at all. > This was always the goal. Really? In 1957 people back then already knew that in the future they would cede their national sovereignty to a unelected bureaucrat in Brussels who would make decisions against their nation's best interest? >It is specifically what everyone signed on to. Who exactly is that "everyone"? I never voted for this. Neither did my parents.
    - vrganj 4mo ago
      There's no boundaries to "ever closer union". That's what ever closer means, definitionally. Nobody was duped into anything, countries exercised their sovereignty to come to an agreement. The rest of your concerns is just how literally any legislation and treaty ever works. When did you sign on to your country's constitution? What about the treaty of Bern establishing the Universal Postal Union in 1874? Key concept here is legal succession.
like_any_other 4mo ago
> I really doubt von der Leyen or anyone in a position of actual power actually cares about this, I am certain they really think this is small time inconsequential bullshit. And yet it just keeps showing up over and over and over again, no matter how many times it's voted down. Someone with no actual power must really not care about this at all.

raxxorraxor 4mo ago

No, people didn't commit to it. That is pretty much the core of the criticism. It will never be a federation and while economic integration is worthwhile, it should be reduced to very clear boundaries.

joe_mamba 4mo ago

>All the quotes are clearly talking about closer integration Are you saying "the ends justify the means" of this "closer integration"? With that logic, Hitler's end goal was also closer integration of Europe's countries once he conquered them all. >If you don't like it leave Impossible to leave now when you joined 20+ years ago, when the EU was something completely different, which now grew beyond what you signed up for, without fucking your economy. It's called a rug pull with a dead man's switch. Try to leave and we make sure we all blow up. >They have much larger problems to deal with, like [...] planning for when Trump inevitably invades Cuba Why is Cuba a bigger issue for Ursula than what's happening in the EU? LAst time I checked Cuba is on a different continent and an insignificant trading partner of the EU.

vrganj 4mo ago
> Impossible to leave now when you joined 20+ years ago, when the EU was something completely different, which now grew beyond what you signed up for, without fucking your economy. It's called a rug pull with a dead man's switch. Try to leave and we make sure we all blow up. The EU was always designed to be an "ever closer union". It's literally in the Treaty of Rome from 1957 (!). This is explicitly what was signed up for. It's going a bit slow, unfortunately, but it is the core point. There's no rug being pulled. This was always the goal. It is specifically what everyone signed on to.
- joe_mamba 4mo ago
  >The EU was always designed to be an "ever closer union". Wow, isn't it convenient that such a vague all-encompassing paper from the past that you never voted for, can be used a justification for anything being done to you today? What are the boundaries for that "ever closer union"? At which point it it just close enough? Or is it open ended? Would you sign an open ended contract with the bank? That wouldn't be legal. >It's literally in the Treaty of Rome from 1957 (!) How many Europeans alive today voted for that in 1957? Were they aware when they signed it of what it would lead to or were they duped into signing something so vague and all-encompassing that will be used to do anything against them in the future? >This is explicitly what was signed up for. That's the problem, it's vague and not explicit at all. > This was always the goal. Really? In 1957 people back then already knew that in the future they would cede their national sovereignty to a unelected bureaucrat in Brussels who would make decisions against their nation's best interest? >It is specifically what everyone signed on to. Who exactly is that "everyone"? I never voted for this. Neither did my parents.
  - vrganj 4mo ago
    There's no boundaries to "ever closer union". That's what ever closer means, definitionally. Nobody was duped into anything, countries exercised their sovereignty to come to an agreement. The rest of your concerns is just how literally any legislation and treaty ever works. When did you sign on to your country's constitution? What about the treaty of Bern establishing the Universal Postal Union in 1874? Key concept here is legal succession.

like_any_other 4mo ago

> I really doubt von der Leyen or anyone in a position of actual power actually cares about this, I am certain they really think this is small time inconsequential bullshit. And yet it just keeps showing up over and over and over again, no matter how many times it's voted down. Someone with no actual power must really not care about this at all.