Politics... World events

[Skarpen]

3 hours ago, Elerond said:

We can just close borders from them, as there is clearly no need to follow EU's agreements 

Wouldn't be the first time EU wouldn't follow its own agreements in favor of pushing ideological agenda.

1 hour ago, Lexx said:

Poland and Hungary are pretty much blocking for each other, which in hindsight is hilarious that this alone works and is able to grind the whole EU mechanism to a halt.

If by EU mechanism you mean turning a economical union into Fourth Reich then it's the best thing ever.

[Elerond]

56 minutes ago, Skarpen said:

Wouldn't be the first time EU wouldn't follow its own agreements in favor of pushing ideological agenda.

If by EU mechanism you mean turning a economical union into Fourth Reich then it's the best thing ever.

Yeah I know, like giving Poland, taxes I paid even though Poland is breaking Treaty of European Union even though rules say that EU should give money to countries that break the Treaty

[Elerond]

2 hours ago, Lexx said:

Poland and Hungary are pretty much blocking for each other, which in hindsight is hilarious that this alone works and is able to grind the whole EU mechanism to a halt.

Only because I allows it. Normally there needs be at least four countries with enough population to block resolution. But in case of corona relief they already moved so grey interpretation of EU's rules that they decides that vote needs be unanimous. 

It is reason why Hungary and Poland weren't able to prevent new directive that will demand that member states follow same values as they had to follow in order to become a member state. So called Rule of Law mechanism (I find it funny that Hungary's and Poland's current governments opposite mechanism with such name )

[Skarpen]

1 hour ago, Elerond said:

Yeah I know, like giving Poland, taxes I paid even though Poland is breaking Treaty of European Union even though rules say that EU should give money to countries that break the Treaty

Except Poland is not breaking the Treaty, EU tries to force Poland into things that are not in the Treaty and they know if they try to blackmail Poland with cutting the money then either Poland will win in EU Court of Justice or plain leave.

42 minutes ago, Elerond said:

So called Rule of Law mechanism 

A wise words "so called". Because as it's worded it doesn't specify what Law it meant and basically would give EU a right to audit any law passed by the member countries or force them to pass any law EU sees fit. And that is no "rule of law" it's dictatorship. EU will stay a union of free and sovereign countries or we bail. No matter how much Germany and France would like to turn it into USoE.

[majestic]

4 hours ago, Skarpen said:

Except Poland is not breaking the Treaty, EU tries to force Poland into things that are not in the Treaty and they know if they try to blackmail Poland with cutting the money then either Poland will win in EU Court of Justice or plain leave.

Bye.

4 hours ago, Skarpen said:

A wise words "so called". Because as it's worded it doesn't specify what Law it meant and basically would give EU a right to audit any law passed by the member countries or force them to pass any law EU sees fit. And that is no "rule of law" it's dictatorship. EU will stay a union of free and sovereign countries or we bail. No matter how much Germany and France would like to turn it into USoE.

A democratically elected governing body passing a law you don't like is a dictatorship. Any election where the outcome isn't what you wanted is rigged.

But everyone else wants the Fourth Reich, right?

[Zoraptor]

Poland voluntarily leaving the EU would be absolutely hilarious- and there's at least one world leader who wouldn't stop laughing until his impending retirement due to Parkinsons.

[Skarpen]

5 hours ago, majestic said:

Bye.

A democratically elected governing body passing a law you don't like is a dictatorship. Any election where the outcome isn't what you wanted is rigged.

But everyone else wants the Fourth Reich, right?

Well I didn't expect anything else from a person who supported "starving" countries as a political tool.

2 hours ago, Zoraptor said:

Poland voluntarily leaving the EU would be absolutely hilarious- and there's at least one world leader who wouldn't stop laughing until his impending retirement due to Parkinsons.

Poland and any other country will leave when it will not be worth to stay anymore. 

[Lexx]

I guess as soon as they either don't want free money anymore, or if they want to go back under russian leadership.

[pmp10]

3 hours ago, Skarpen said:

Poland and any other country will leave when it will not be worth to stay anymore. 

Good thing that assessment is not up to you then.
What was the last polls on the matter? 80-90% in favor of stay?

13 minutes ago, Lexx said:

I guess as soon as they either don't want free money anymore, or if they want to go back under russian leadership.

As if EU was of any help in either case.
 

[Skarpen]

31 minutes ago, Lexx said:

I guess as soon as they either don't want free money anymore, or if they want to go back under russian leadership.

There is no such thing as free lunch. EU budget is not free money. 

17 minutes ago, pmp10 said:

Good thing that assessment is not up to you then.
What was the last polls on the matter? 80-90% in favor of stay?

Did I say anything about leaving right now?

[Gorth]

EU lost its way when they decided they wanted to be a giant nation state rather than a trade block.

 

(proud "no!" voter to the Maastricht treaty 1992)

 

Not living there anymore, I'm slightly indifferent to the whole thing (unlike in 1992 when the referendum was taking place in Denmark), but if Poland decides to pack up and leave some day, I'm going to laugh my ass off at the British. As mentioned previously, the lack of a mechanism for stopping the Polish immigrants moving to the UK was constantly repeated argument for the 'leave' side. Take control of our border, we are a sovereign nation... all the usual nationalist rhetoric. If it in 5-10 years turns out they could have saved the whole referendum thing and uncountable billions of British Pounds... then yeah, I'll sit and chuckle while sipping on my Cognac (made in France)

 

The Fish and Chips were Ok though.

[Skarpen]

23 minutes ago, Gorth said:

EU lost its way when they decided they wanted to be a giant nation state rather than a trade block.

Agree.

[majestic]

5 hours ago, Skarpen said:

Well I didn't expect anything else from a person who supported "starving" countries as a political tool.

I didn't, but you're trying really hard to change my mind, aren't you?

5 hours ago, Skarpen said:

Poland and any other country will leave when it will not be worth to stay anymore. 

Bye.

[Elerond]

On 12/16/2020 at 7:47 PM, Skarpen said:

Except Poland is not breaking the Treaty, EU tries to force Poland into things that are not in the Treaty and they know if they try to blackmail Poland with cutting the money then either Poland will win in EU Court of Justice or plain leave.

Yeah that is why it is against Rule of Law mechanism, which puts sanctions to countries that follow principals in article 2 of the treaty of the European Union

But I know that other EU member states are conspiring against Poland and Hungary with their unfounded beliefs that democracy and human rights are something that EU member states should respect, just like how president Trump was cheated from having second term by tyrannical opposition that conspired with media to take power from poor and defenseless government. 

[BruceVC]

 

On 12/17/2020 at 5:37 AM, Skarpen said:

Well I didn't expect anything else from a person who supported "starving" countries as a political tool.

Poland and any other country will leave when it will not be worth to stay anymore. 

Just so I am clear can you summarize some  of the issues some Polish people may have with the EU

On 12/17/2020 at 10:02 AM, Gorth said:

EU lost its way when they decided they wanted to be a giant nation state rather than a trade block.

 

(proud "no!" voter to the Maastricht treaty 1992)

 

Not living there anymore, I'm slightly indifferent to the whole thing (unlike in 1992 when the referendum was taking place in Denmark), but if Poland decides to pack up and leave some day, I'm going to laugh my ass off at the British. As mentioned previously, the lack of a mechanism for stopping the Polish immigrants moving to the UK was constantly repeated argument for the 'leave' side. Take control of our border, we are a sovereign nation... all the usual nationalist rhetoric. If it in 5-10 years turns out they could have saved the whole referendum thing and uncountable billions of British Pounds... then yeah, I'll sit and chuckle while sipping on my Cognac (made in France)

 

The Fish and Chips were Ok though.

 

Gorthfuscious I have always been concerned with this negative view you seem to have of the EU....but then I realize  I dont understand what you actually mean by " way when they decided they wanted to be a giant nation state rather than a trade block.though" and " proud "no!" voter to the Maastricht treaty 1992" as its before my time and how I can easily tell you all the reasons the EU is the worlds most successful economic union and works. But you have to accept to be part of the EU every country has to accept certain EU laws and regulations that are about the whole EU and not optional

But this is a small price to pay for the advantages of the EU and the economic advantages of single market 

Edited December 19, 2020 by BruceVC

[Gorth]

2 hours ago, BruceVC said:

 

Just so I am clear can you summarize some  of the issues some Polish people may have with the EU

 

Gorthfuscious I have always been concerned with this negative view you seem to have of the EU....but then I realize  I dont understand what you actually mean by " way when they decided they wanted to be a giant nation state rather than a trade block.though" and " proud "no!" voter to the Maastricht treaty 1992" as its before my time and how I can easily tell you all the reasons the EU is the worlds most successful economic union and works. But you have to accept to be part of the EU every country has to accept certain EU laws and regulations that are about the whole EU and not optional

But this is a small price to pay for the advantages of the EU and the economic advantages of single market 

No. It's not a small price. Ask the board members from the US how much friction you always end up with when the federal government overrules state decisions and legislation. Here we're not talking about states that are only a couple of centuries old at best, but countries, many of which have been self governing for a millennia or more. But that is sort of besides the point.

 

Back when it was still the EC (the predecessor of the EU). Brussels was something too far away, with a commission that worked more like a board of directors, all of it's members being appointed, not elected. The European parliament has always been a joke. Back when I was still living there, it was a meme, that politicians who fell from grace in their home countries for this and that scandal would get the "golden handshake". Which was sending them to the European Parliament where they would spend all their time lining their pockets with unbelievable salaries and tax benefits. Out of sight, out of mind, not doing too much damage anymore in their country of origin. Which means, the real power is the commission.

 

EU was the move to centralize legislative power in Brussels, gradually turning national parliaments into something that is just a token gesture while all decision making should be done in Brussels, overriding any national legislation the member countries. I.e. effectively turning member countries into vassals of a powerful Brussels, which as mentioned before is not ruled by an elected body. It makes it too easy for large and powerful corporations, banks, other interest groups etc. to assert themselves, because there is only one point they need to convince if they want local laws changed to suit their needs. Don't like the minimum wages in country x, y and z? No worries, tell your lobbyists in Brussels to "get it fixed" and local law making bodies can do nothing.

So no, I don't think the EU is beneficial to Europeans. It's predecessor organization was, because it was a trade block, benefitting the member countries. The current project is just a power grab by the eurocrats in Brussels, wanting a strong, centralized power in a new "super state", doing away with the member countries sovereignty.

So yeah, as far as I'm concerned, the EU can rot and burn and I'll happily watch the flames while sipping aforementioned Cognac, pondering the folly of man who just can't seem to learn anything from history. The bigger they become, the harder they fall. I would like to invite you to the anarchists club, but there is no organization you can join, too disorganized

[Skarpen]

13 hours ago, Elerond said:

Yeah that is why it is against Rule of Law mechanism, which puts sanctions to countries that follow principals in article 2 of the treaty of the European Union

Poland is against it because we read beyond the title which you clearly did not. Read up what power it grants to whom against whom and on what grounds.

11 hours ago, BruceVC said:

Just so I am clear can you summarize some  of the issues some Polish people may have with the EU

In points:

EU shifts from being the economic union between equal sovereign countries into centrally managed supercountry with members as vassals.

EU gives itself power and tools that are were never granted to it in any treaty.

EU interferes in member states affairs that are not in any way under EU jurisdiction and are explicitly up to member countries governments.

EU breaks their own rules and treaties if it suits the big countries like Germany and France.

EU big countries try to enforce certain political and social ideologies on other members.

[majestic]

 

8 hours ago, Gorth said:

 I.e. effectively turning member countries into vassals of a powerful Brussels, which as mentioned before is not ruled by an elected body.

I was sitting here for a while and typing up a post, but let's try something different. Let me ask you a question.

Is Donald Trump not an elected president of the United States? Is his government not an elected body of the United States?

[Gorth]

26 minutes ago, majestic said:

 

I was sitting here for a while and typing up a post, but let's try something different. Let me ask you a question.

Is Donald Trump not an elected president of the United States? Is his government not an elected body of the United States?

Indirectly. He was elected by the electoral college. The federal government was appointed by him, not elected per se.  The state electors were appointed by the states according to each states rules (the majority allocating all electoral slots to the popular winner of the states votes)

[majestic]

51 minutes ago, Gorth said:

Indirectly. He was elected by the electoral college. The federal government was appointed by him, not elected per se.  The state electors were appointed by the states according to each states rules (the majority allocating all electoral slots to the popular winner of the states votes)

How's the Commission not an - indirectly indeed! - elected body then, outside of (populist) Anti-EU rhetoric?

I don't disagree. The Commission should have less power and the EU Parliament more, but that's something else than not being an elected body and all that. We're all at fault for the Moloch in Brussels. The EU could try to not vote for the parties of the EPP for instance. That would be a change.

It's also really funny when you think that Orbán is one of the biggest critics of the EU and its drive for a more centralized supranational governing body but all the Hungarian votes for Fidesz go directly into the EPP's power pool... the same faction that wants the centralization in the first place. It's downright schizophrenic, and they're not going to change it. The EPP needs Fidesz for the seats and Orbán can do with the EPP's goodwill.

Although I heard he wants to leave. Good for him. Actually... good for everyone. Down with the EPP.

Edited December 19, 2020 by majestic

[Gorth]

29 minutes ago, majestic said:

How's the Commission not an - indirectly indeed! - elected body then, outside of (populist) Anti-EU rhetoric?

One small, but important difference (imho), apart from the original 13 states who formed the union, states who joined later knew what they were getting into. Sure, the constitution has been amended a bit over the decades, but largely the mechanisms from 1776 are still there. If the Danish government even knew (I doubt it) they sure as heck didn't tell the Danish population what the long term intention was when they had referendums for joining the EC or not in 61 (I'm relying on my parents account of those years btw, I wasn't born yet). So it feels more like a bait and switch operation.

EC: Look, I got an ice cream for you, want to try it?

People of Denmark: Ooh, looks nice. Sure, lets have a taste.

EC: (evil mustache twirl) Sucker! *Grab* All your ass and your children and children's children are our property now and forever!

Mind you, we even got off relatively easily because we voted no to the Maastricht Treaty.

Then the government decided that people just doesn't know how to vote properly and came up the great idea to repeat the referendum until people got it and eventually vote the way the political establishment wanted it.

The nation wide riots (people being very upset with the governments decision to keep calling new referendums) that followed was the first time since 1945 that police started shooting people on the streets (based on memory, take with a grain of salt, but iirc a dozen people got shot in Copenhagen by police). Because, you know, we can't have people rioting when we, the all wise politicians and gods gift to the Danish people ignore the results of the vote. At least the revised version of the treaty left Denmark out of all the major parts. One of the reasons Denmark kept its own currency and controls its own fiscal policy.

[pmp10]

7 minutes ago, Gorth said:

If the Danish government even knew (I doubt it) they sure as heck didn't tell the Danish population what the long term intention was when they had referendums for joining the EC or not in 61 (I'm relying on my parents account of those years btw, I wasn't born yet). So it feels more like a bait and switch operation.

I doubt most politicians back then would agree that 'ever closer union' was the EUs objective.

As for Maastricht - this has always been a top-down project, seeing it pushed by hook and crook shouldn't surprise anyone. 

[213374U]

 

29 minutes ago, majestic said:

How's the Commission not an - indirectly indeed! - elected body then, outside of (populist) Anti-EU rhetoric?

That's a fair question. "Indirectly" elected isn't the same as just plain elected and while perhaps technically correct, the devil is in the details. Neither commissioners nor the president have to be MEPs. Parliament doesn't actually propose a candidate for the presidency, that's up to the Council, which is itself not "directly" elected either, even though Parliament has to confirm the nomination. Parliament cannot veto individual commissioners, only threaten to vote out the whole Commission. Which would be a fine check to the legislative power if there was such a thing as EU presidential elections, but there aren't. It's all backroom dealing.

So yeah, all in all, I think democracy is rather diluted in the workings of the EU, an issue further compounded by the issue you brought up about the weird way national parties sometimes align with EP formations. From the point of view of this anti-EU populist, the EU tries hard to sell the idea that it is democratic while being designed to be strongly insulated from the bedlam that is the European people's voting habits, political sensibilities and mood swings.

[BruceVC]

11 hours ago, Gorth said:

No. It's not a small price. Ask the board members from the US how much friction you always end up with when the federal government overrules state decisions and legislation. Here we're not talking about states that are only a couple of centuries old at best, but countries, many of which have been self governing for a millennia or more. But that is sort of besides the point.

 

Back when it was still the EC (the predecessor of the EU). Brussels was something too far away, with a commission that worked more like a board of directors, all of it's members being appointed, not elected. The European parliament has always been a joke. Back when I was still living there, it was a meme, that politicians who fell from grace in their home countries for this and that scandal would get the "golden handshake". Which was sending them to the European Parliament where they would spend all their time lining their pockets with unbelievable salaries and tax benefits. Out of sight, out of mind, not doing too much damage anymore in their country of origin. Which means, the real power is the commission.

 

EU was the move to centralize legislative power in Brussels, gradually turning national parliaments into something that is just a token gesture while all decision making should be done in Brussels, overriding any national legislation the member countries. I.e. effectively turning member countries into vassals of a powerful Brussels, which as mentioned before is not ruled by an elected body. It makes it too easy for large and powerful corporations, banks, other interest groups etc. to assert themselves, because there is only one point they need to convince if they want local laws changed to suit their needs. Don't like the minimum wages in country x, y and z? No worries, tell your lobbyists in Brussels to "get it fixed" and local law making bodies can do nothing.

So no, I don't think the EU is beneficial to Europeans. It's predecessor organization was, because it was a trade block, benefitting the member countries. The current project is just a power grab by the eurocrats in Brussels, wanting a strong, centralized power in a new "super state", doing away with the member countries sovereignty.

So yeah, as far as I'm concerned, the EU can rot and burn and I'll happily watch the flames while sipping aforementioned Cognac, pondering the folly of man who just can't seem to learn anything from history. The bigger they become, the harder they fall. I would like to invite you to the anarchists club, but there is no organization you can join, too disorganized

I am glad you responded in such detail as it demonstrates you have lived experience that explains your opinion or a view that is informed on other similar views I have heard around this negative view of the EU

I am really glad you made the point in this way as I did some research around this and want to share some different realities on the EU but first I just want to clarify something so we on the same page, in summary you saying the EU is not a real success or representation of the power of unity of EU because 

1. The current EU actually reduces or limits the real power and choices  of citizens because of how laws can change through the EU that immediately can  make the citizens have less or no say 
2. The current Brussels HQ passes laws that can undermine the rights of countries and they end up losing sovereignty, so the EU becomes autocratic and less in touch with citizens right
3. What would you solution  be in summary, for example would you reduce certain Brussels law to grant more independence.  You always need to provide a high level alternative to any existing government model if you accuse them of such egregious policies and outcomes  
4. Finally are you someone who may have real opinions of historical events  based on work, levels of research and often lived experience that you naturally and normally believe and this view could shape other opinions which is how most of us formulate our views on topics, geopolitics  and ideologies. But if you were presented with irrefutable evidence that gave you a different view of your old opinion would you update and accept the new information? This can be harder than you think because older views are sometimes trenchant or exist in  worlds of   " subconscious bias " but its always better to update views that dont represent all the facts ?

 

 

Edited December 19, 2020 by BruceVC

[BruceVC]

1 hour ago, majestic said:

How's the Commission not an - indirectly indeed! - elected body then, outside of (populist) Anti-EU rhetoric?

I don't disagree. The Commission should have less power and the EU Parliament more, but that's something else than not being an elected body and all that. We're all at fault for the Moloch in Brussels. The EU could try to not vote for the parties of the EPP for instance. That would be a change.

It's also really funny when you think that Orbán is one of the biggest critics of the EU and its drive for a more centralized supranational governing body but all the Hungarian votes for Fidesz go directly into the EPP's power pool... the same faction that wants the centralization in the first place. It's downright schizophrenic, and they're not going to change it. The EPP needs Fidesz for the seats and Orbán can do with the EPP's goodwill.

Although I heard he wants to leave. Good for him. Actually... good for everyone. Down with the EPP.

Majestic why you trying to starve countries into submission?

I am surprised but strangely impressed as this an effective strategy but nowadays considered anathema and counter to most human rights that our Constitutions directly protect 

But there are sometimes gray areas in life and you never know when you may experience them