171–180 of 210 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I still dont understand how a thing that passes this way has any legitimacy? Cant the EU just not allow it to be enforced?
That's a bit of a touchy subject that exposes the fact that the EU has repurposed a system for designing industry standards (not laws) and has a shaky legal foundation. To some extent countries are bound by EU law, but what this means depends on the institutions and legal structure within that country. Although the EU tends to claim they have final say, but how can someone interpreting national law agree with that if…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are you saying that historically very bureaucratic countries have been worse to live in than dictatorships? Not sure I follow actually. It sounds very strange to me. Isn’t also the first move of all dictators to take over all institutions with their own people?
They are saying that in bureaucratic countries there is not a single entity that can be held accountable, which means that "bad" decisions, are not easily undone. Likewise it means that "good" decisions are hard to change. It is a statement about the momentum of change, not about it's worth or intention. There is no further comparison made between these governmental forms and how they affect their subjects. Why would…
The European Commission has far too much power, and answers far too little to the populace. In reality, they want to be dictators. If you don't know, the unfortunate way thf EU is structured, the Parliament cannot initiate legislation. They can only vote on whatever the Commission puts in front of them. If the Parliament votes "wrong", the Commission just repackages the idea in a new bill, pulls a couple of dirty tri…
This is an incredibly uninformed take on how the EU is structured and completely undermine the argument you’re trying to make.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That is the structure of the EU. Wannabe fascists propose all kinds of laws, then a democracy chooses which ones it wants.
Or democraticallly rejects them, but trough unbelievable trickery they still become law. See Chat Control, which never had majority support in parliament. Democracy with Brussels characteristics.
Because said criminals will politely follow the law and use the broken, backdoor-ed encryption? Instead of the widely available opensourced true encryption? Of course not.
The true goal is mass surveillance - not protection from
The European Commission has far too much power, and answers far too little to the populace. In reality, they want to be dictators. If you don't know, the unfortunate way thf EU is structured, the Parliament cannot initiate legislation. They can only vote on whatever the Commission puts in front of them. If the Parliament votes "wrong", the Commission just repackages the idea in a new bill, pulls a couple of dirty tri…
The European Commission has far too much power, and answers far too little to the populace. In reality, they want to be dictators. If you don't know, the unfortunate way thf EU is structured, the Parliament cannot initiate legislation. They can only vote on whatever the Commission puts in front of them. If the Parliament votes "wrong", the Commission just repackages the idea in a new bill, pulls a couple of dirty tri…
This its more like an oligarch edict with democratic dressing. Its set up so the European elite can force political chance without having to deal with annoying things like democracy other than in name
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is true. However there's a potential way to fix it, and it would only take one member state, no matter how small to start the landslide. And it's basically the same thing that happened to the US Senate. The Senate, like the Council of Ministers, was intended to represent the member states. Originally, Senators were appointed by state legislatures. A few states started to have direct primaries, with the legislati…
Look to the Westminster system for the true solution to the Commission’s lack of accountability. Let the MEPs of each country vote on who amongst them will sit on the Commission.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There will always be extremists on both sides of the political spectrum. The problem is quite simple: people swing more to one side or another if their voices are not heard. The current boogeyman is the growth of the far-right in Europe. But that could have been prevented if the EU did not have an open-doors migration policy to start with. And to have listened to the people on other issues too.
> But that could have been prevented if the EU did not have an open-doors migration policy to start with. And to have listened to the people on other issues too. I believe there are more nuances to this, then simply blaming it on immigration policies. There are a lot of variables in place for why far right movements are and have been on the rise in the EU. And I certainly believe the issues could've been handled bett…
1. My country never colonized any other part if the world.
2. This does not mean that say Germany or France must import millions of “migrants” because their ancestors made some terrible choices in the past.
3. If they want to import “migrants”, they should screen them and only import highly skilled to extrenely skilled ones.