Live data from Hacker News

Hungary No Longer a Democracy – Freedom House

politico.com

1–10 of 18 posts

Re: Hungary No Longer a Democracy – Freedom House

#3
post #2

Expel them from the EU and NATO. Europe must take a hardline on this or other countries will follow Poland and Hungry's path.

It takes a unanimous vote to admit or expel a country (minus one in the case of expelling), IIUC. The EU couldn't kick Hungary out because Poland wouldn't support it.

It's the same reason a theoretical independent Scotland wouldn't be admitted – there's no way that Spain would want precedent set that a country can split off and then rejoin the EU.

Re: Hungary No Longer a Democracy – Freedom House

#4
post #2

Expel them from the EU and NATO. Europe must take a hardline on this or other countries will follow Poland and Hungry's path.

It takes a unanimous vote to admit or expel a country (minus one in the case of expelling), IIUC. The EU couldn't kick Hungary out because Poland wouldn't support it. It's the same reason a theoretical independent Scotland wouldn't be admitted – there's no way that Spain would want precedent set that a country can split off and then rejoin the EU.

So the more corrupt and undemocratic the European Union gets, the more constrained the remaining democratic members are from acting on it?

Who came up with that structure?

Re: Hungary No Longer a Democracy – Freedom House

#5
post #2

Expel them from the EU and NATO. Europe must take a hardline on this or other countries will follow Poland and Hungry's path.

It takes a unanimous vote to admit or expel a country (minus one in the case of expelling), IIUC. The EU couldn't kick Hungary out because Poland wouldn't support it. It's the same reason a theoretical independent Scotland wouldn't be admitted – there's no way that Spain would want precedent set that a country can split off and then rejoin the EU.

That has been a common and reasonable understanding of Spain's veto potential for a while; that said, their foreign minister has indicated otherwise:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/02/spain-drops...

Re: Hungary No Longer a Democracy – Freedom House

#7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It takes a unanimous vote to admit or expel a country (minus one in the case of expelling), IIUC. The EU couldn't kick Hungary out because Poland wouldn't support it. It's the same reason a theoretical independent Scotland wouldn't be admitted – there's no way that Spain would want precedent set that a country can split off and then rejoin the EU.

So the more corrupt and undemocratic the European Union gets, the more constrained the remaining democratic members are from acting on it? Who came up with that structure?

They can still act on it. They just don't have the power to strip Hungary of their voting rights (or theoretically kick them out) without unanimous support.

They can do things like block the Hungarian govt's access to EU funds, bring a case to the European Court of Justice, etc.

Re: Hungary No Longer a Democracy – Freedom House

#8
post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It takes a unanimous vote to admit or expel a country (minus one in the case of expelling), IIUC. The EU couldn't kick Hungary out because Poland wouldn't support it. It's the same reason a theoretical independent Scotland wouldn't be admitted – there's no way that Spain would want precedent set that a country can split off and then rejoin the EU.

That has been a common and reasonable understanding of Spain's veto potential for a while; that said, their foreign minister has indicated otherwise: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/02/spain-drops...

Interesting! I hadn't heard that.

Though I'm cynical enough to doubt if they would follow through – talk is cheap now, as they're not in much danger of Boris Johnson giving Scotland another indyref.

Re: Hungary No Longer a Democracy – Freedom House

#9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It takes a unanimous vote to admit or expel a country (minus one in the case of expelling), IIUC. The EU couldn't kick Hungary out because Poland wouldn't support it. It's the same reason a theoretical independent Scotland wouldn't be admitted – there's no way that Spain would want precedent set that a country can split off and then rejoin the EU.

So the more corrupt and undemocratic the European Union gets, the more constrained the remaining democratic members are from acting on it? Who came up with that structure?

> Who came up with that structure?

Inherent complexity.

You see, it's hard to know in advance all consequences of today's decisions. A person or a political body may have all good intentions, yet with time passing, rules which seems unambiguous and good suddenly are viewed in another light. Many rules can be applied technically correctly, but contrary to the ideas there were when the rules were created.

Sometimes the consequences are seen - there's just no way to avoid them, short of skipping the rulemaking. Sometimes they are not. It seems like legislation, while on the surface similar to software making - only for humans, not computers - in reality works with critically different constraints. That is, computers are relatively easy modeled as systems with clear set of states, while human societies are not.

One may play with the idea to require to attach to every law at the moment of enacting an informal, but complete, as it is feasible, explanation for why the law is created, what its intent and limitations. This will probably won't always work; it may shift problems elsewhere with application - interpretation - of laws though.

Coming back to your question - do you see this scenario you described as visible and deserving attention at the time EU rules were made?

Re: Hungary No Longer a Democracy – Freedom House

#10
post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That has been a common and reasonable understanding of Spain's veto potential for a while; that said, their foreign minister has indicated otherwise: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/02/spain-drops...

Interesting! I hadn't heard that. Though I'm cynical enough to doubt if they would follow through – talk is cheap now, as they're not in much danger of Boris Johnson giving Scotland another indyref.

If recent British PM history is any indication, Johnson won't hold the position for too long.
Post reply on HN