The European Union. Everyone keep calm. Be civil.

Users who are viewing this thread

You're right. I thought the Council of Europe was part of the EU. They should really change their flag. It's confusing :smile:
You just need the right picture!
400px-Supranational_European_Bodies-en.svg.png
 
I don't speak/read Italian. I was referring to the images.
Angela Merkel has no influence on German politics anymore. She is portrayed with high ranking Nazis (in Greece), but her politics were not national socialism. In fact very far from it. Same for Macron, who is far from a national socialist.
When you start a topic with such extremist symbolism it's hard to even get into a meaningful conversation.
 
Okay. The auto-translate is a bit "hit-and-miss", though.
The EU is a democratic union and all members are there voluntarily and can opt out if they so wish (like the UK).
We can then discuss all the areas where it could be more democratic and other criticism.
But again, drawing extreme parallels is a very poor starting point for a discussion.
 
Ah, yes, comparing a country where the will and word of one man was literally put above all its legislation, including the constitution, with a supranational organisation that has more checks and balances than the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and more confusing organisational structure than the K. u. K. Monarchy sure is fair.
 
Ah, yes, comparing a country where the will and word of one man was literally put above all its legislation, including the constitution, with a supranational organisation that has more checks and balances than the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and more confusing organisational structure than the K. u. K. Monarchy sure is fair.
Since we are all here for a useless reason, let's make something useful out of it.
You are the one closest to the EU and most knowledgable of its inner workings - so what would be your worst criticism of the EU? And your best praise?
(Full disclosure: part of my work is to prepare EU-funded projects, so I do have some limited exposure to its policies and priorities)
 
It's so easy the make a meme, much more hard studying the history behind the creation of the EU. The nazi representations of the two presidents actually have much more serious reasons than you think. Prof. Savona and Gregor Gysi were talking about it, but who cares, let's meme! ?

The EU is a democratic union and all members are there voluntarily and can opt out if they so wish (like the UK).
To me, it's not democratic at all. The European commission and ECB (which is independent) are our government in fact and they are non-elected (from people) but burocrats. There are hundreds off lobbies behind like Business Europe. You can believe that they do the good of the people, but in fact they only respond to private interests (of big companies and hedge funds).
There are countries that still give priority to the national constitution, such as France and Germany, not surprisingly the dominant countries in the European Union. But other countries, like Italy, are completely submissive. Surely a lot of the fault lies with the weak establishment, but in part it is also due to the blackmail of the EU which is essentially in the hands of the two countries above.
Also remember that the European constitution was rejected by the people wherever a referendum was held: France, Holland and Ireland (the first time). This "constitution" was thrown out the door and returned through the window with another name: the Treaty of Lisbon. Literally written to be incomprehensible. Some guys just don't want to accept that people have the power to decide anything.

I agree that any country can leave the EU or revert to its national currency, but very few countries have the strength of the UK.

This is an old but interesting journalistic investigation that I suggest to watch:

Subs and translation available.
 
Last edited:
To me, it's not democratic at all. The European commission and ECB (which is independent) are our government in fact and they are non-elected (from people) but burocrats. There are hundreds off lobbies behind like Business Europe. You can believe that they do the good of the people, but in fact they only respond to private interests (of big companies and hedge funds).
Now that is something we can discuss properly, instead of infantile Nazi imagery.
The European Commission is equally represented by all countries and the members are elected by the local/national governments.
They are not elected by bureaucrats, unless you mean something specific by that.
The ECB effectively deals in economic/monetary policies and I also find that democratically troubling.
Your criticism of lobbyism and the influence of companies I can get behind, but it's also a problem in all national governance.
 
Also if we really want to talk about corruption in Italian politics, the EU really is the last of our problems.

I am also not sure how carefully you watched the second video yourself. Gysi is in favor of keeping the Euro, and he states that in this video (I get the feeling that you might disagree with that). He is also a career politician who thrives from making controversial statements (he is famous for having publicly implied that all Germans are Nazi).

Both videos that you shared are purely political statements. They are great for stirring emotions, but I don't see anything fact based which one can use in a rational conversation.
 
Since we are all here for a useless reason, let's make something useful out of it.
You are the one closest to the EU and most knowledgable of its inner workings - so what would be your worst criticism of the EU? And your best praise?
(Full disclosure: part of my work is to prepare EU-funded projects, so I do have some limited exposure to its policies and priorities)
I will get to you likely on Tuesday becase tommorrow I am, uh, leaving with my university's team for Budapest to coach them in an EU law moot court competition :lol:
 
It's so easy the make a meme, much more hard studying the history behind the creation of the EU. The nazi representations of the two presidents actually have much more serious reasons than you think.
Considering your last post in the Ukraine Today thread was a meme in poor taste about the Ukrainian resistance being a bunch of Nazis, I have reason to suspect you're a bit preoccupied.

Everyone else is a Nazi and vaccines are ineffective, you're 0 for 2 here so you might as well swing for the fences next time.
 
Looks like one of the biggest corruption scandals in EU history.
"They are charged with participation in a criminal organisation, money laundering and corruption [...]."

The prosecutor said investigators had suspected that a Gulf state [Qatar] had been influencing economic and political decisions of the parliament for several months, especially by targeting aides.
 
let's unpack
It's so easy the make a meme, much more hard studying the history behind the creation of the EU. The nazi representations of the two presidents actually have much more serious reasons than you think. Prof. Savona and Gregor Gysi were talking about it, but who cares, let's meme! ?
Says the one posting magazine covers whose meanings you probably did not even get. Hint: The Spiegel did not believe Merkel is a Nazi. The Spiegel said you believe that.
To me, it's not democratic at all. The European commission and ECB (which is independent) are our government in fact and they are non-elected (from people) but burocrats. There are hundreds off lobbies behind like Business Europe. You can believe that they do the good of the people, but in fact they only respond to private interests (of big companies and hedge funds).
Yeah. Well, you do know how representative democracies work? Hint: You do not vote everybody into power, but you vote certain bodies into power who then create a government.

In the EU that is the parliament and the EU Council, the later being the sole arbiter of power in the EU as representative of the nation states. The EU commission are bureaucrats and not the government but the executing bureaucratic layer implmenting what the EU Council decided, sanctioned and ratified by the EU parlament. Guess what. You also do not vote for the secretaries and under secretaries of a national government in most countries. You neither do vote for the ministers. In plenty of parliamentary democracies you only vote for the federal parliament and for the state parliaments (if applicable). This is essentially the same mechanics at work in a different framework.

Second aspect of the EU being undemocratic claim. It is untrue and where you perceive it to be it is by design at demand of EU sceptics, to keep power with the nation states and the national parliaments.
The EU is not a federal state, but a confederacy of sovereign nation states. As such the premier institution is not the parliament but the representative body of the EU nation states: The EU Council.
That is why the council calls the shot, the EU only gets money from its national governments, and the Commission is only exercising the power at digression of the Council. That is also why the EU parliament is heavily gimped not to be able to supercede the Council. Still their oversight powers grew over the years. Including heavy vetting of the commissioners.

A central bank being independent is actually also pretty normal in market economies. Or more precisely at least a great delegation of power to it concerning monetary policies. Does not make it a government.


There are countries that still give priority to the national constitution, such as France and Germany, not surprisingly the dominant countries in the European Union. But other countries, like Italy, are completely submissive. Surely a lot of the fault lies with the weak establishment, but in part it is also due to the blackmail of the EU which is essentially in the hands of the two countries above.
Unsubstianted claim needs substance. Pretty much every nationality in the EU will claim that about their own government and accuse others of the opposite. Cue in Germans complaining that their tax money pays everyone else's fancy projects while Germany's infrastructure falls apart.

Also remember that the European constitution was rejected by the people wherever a referendum was held: France, Holland and Ireland (the first time). This "constitution" was thrown out the door and returned through the window with another name: the Treaty of Lisbon. Literally written to be incomprehensible. Some guys just don't want to accept that people have the power to decide anything.
Someone obviously not understanding the differences the Treaty has to the Constitution.
Coming back to the EU being structures to retain full sovereignigty of the nation states. By downgrading the entire constitution to a international treaty the very power structure was shifted back to national parliaments because national parliaments can nullify international treaties. A constitution would supercede them.

The Treaty of Lisbon is the solution to accepting the rejection of a full constitution while implementing necessary organisational aspects to keep the EU running. The only alternative would have been the dissolution of the EU, but people just voted they don't want a EU constitution.

I agree that any country can leave the EU or revert to its national currency, but very few countries have the strength of the UK.
Which implies it is advantegous not to do it, otherwise it would not require strength to compensate for the disadvantages this act incurs. The EU is also the only such political entity to even allow members to leave. Cue, the United States of 1861 technically did, too. But they started shooting. The EU did not. That is what 150 years of progress looks like.

This is an old but interesting journalistic investigation that I suggest to watch:

Subs and translation available.

You cannot simply post something random without any academic credibility or journalistic reputation that is international known and expect people to waste 45 minutes of their time expecting it will convince them of anything. Why should people?
 
Back
Top Bottom