European Parliamentary Elections results, major concern?

[Barothmuk]

RE: the Nazi economy.

 

Functionally the Nazi economy was capitalist; it worked in cooperation with leading industrialists with the state's primary role being a suppressor of any organised labour. Policy wise under Schacht they pursued radical Keynesian policies of high public spending with large deficits and under Göring they shifted to a (rather poor) war economy which was sustained by having the private sector controlled by price, wage and financial controls.

[Meshugger]

And yes, Bruce is actually right on the common identity thing. There are simply too many languages and cultures in the EU to allow any deeper "integration". While we share to a certain degree common western values, we do not share any cultural identities. English is the language of the trade, which is also the very reason why most people like EU as a coalition of trade agreements. Because if you want anything deeper than that, you have to learn the languages and cultures of each nation, or simply dismantle or undermine each of them. Which is why it is not going to fly for anyone except for the beaurocrats in Brussels.

[Elerond]

 

The really important point for EU tubthumpers is that almost no bastard voted.

 

The really important unanswered question is: what is the point of a nation which no one feels even the slightest interest in?

 

...besides the bureaucrats getting fat off it.

 

Reading all the comments from people who live in the EU has made me realize something, or rather has made me think of the biggest challenge facing the continued longevity of the EU

 

When I asked questions what people didn't like about EU there are several common themes that are relevant like immigration and a distant central government that people don't relate to

 

But what about the issue of identity? I don't think the EU countries share a true common identity and that's understandable. For example the French are the French and have there own history. They may have great fondness for the Norwegians but do they really share an identity? The EU is an attempt to force a common framework between countries that for thousands of years have been proudly independent through there history, culture and language. No wonder there is this rise of nationalism with "far right " parties gaining votes through slogans like " we represent the true identity of country x"

 

Its actually been relatively easy for "far right" parties to gain support not just because  the EU parliament sits in Brussels but the fact that end of the day I think most people prefer  being part of there own country and culture rather  than being part of some nebulous " EU common brotherhood". You then add economic and social issues to the EU mix and you have serious disillusionment with the EU structures

 

I am not suggesting the EU countries don't like each other or xenophobia is systemic. I am saying you can't force countries to form a union with the objective of economic prosperity without looking at the important issue of cultural identity and how that will be effect the perception of the success of the union as time goes on

 

Look at the USA, each state is almost like a separate country. But the USA works because despite some of the differences between the states almost all US citizens are united by one common thread. They are all American in identity. And that's what the EU lacks?

 

 

I have traveled all over EU (+ Switzerland)  during this month and I found out that lots of people had common European identity and they didn't treat me as stranger even then when we didn't had any common language, where I saw people outside of Europe get much colder treatment.

 

So there is such thing as European identity, but it is not as strong as identity that people feel towards their own country, which is probably one main reasons why people object EU's development towards federation instead of union of independent countries. And I know that lots of EU opposition comes from our politicians that uses EU as explanation for many laws that have lots of opposition, even though truth is usually that those laws would have been made even without EU and EU's directives (which our politicians themselves were part of creating in first place) would have allowed versions that would have been much more liking of those people that opposite them.

 

So I would say that for most people it is not union of independent European nations that they opposite, but idea/fear that there is some alien entity that can overrule their country's decisions, which is the thing that most anti EU populist parties use in their campaigns and is therefore probably the thing that those parties actually don't want get rid of, as it would mean decrease of their popularity. 

 

So I would say best thing for EU would be make its process better known and much more transparent, for example by broadcasting European Parliament's, Council of the European Union's and European Commission's sessions in TV and internet, and by advocating media outlets to reporting more about their decisions making. Because in my opinion biggest threat for EU is that people don't know how it works and mental image about cabinet decisions that are done behind closed doors. 

[TheChris92]

Yes, it is rather disconcerting to wake up in the morning and see that the most racist political party in the country walks away with not just a victory, but incidentally a landslide-victory. Partly due to recurring incidents of fraud with Right-Wing Party Venstre's chairman Lars Løkke continously being caught with his hand in the cookie jar -- involving him using tax payer money or his own party's funds to pay for his holiday trips or expensive **** for himself. It's not done wonders for Venstre, especially not during the EU elections, but it has turned the opinion of the current ruling Social Democrats, having slightly gained more mandates. It doesn't change that they've failed to live up to any promises and are essentially doing a 180 by leading Right-Wing politics as opposed to Left-Winged. It's quite upside down, given how the Right-Wingers are now leaning towards Left-Winged politics and vice versa. Dansk Folkeparti (Danish People's Party) have not become housebroken, it's 1 out of 4 of the population who've started to pee in the corners.

 

Heck, I thought it was a joke when I read that a Neo-Nazi from Germany obtained a seat in the EU. It doesn't bode well.

[Tagaziel]

I have traveled all over EU (+ Switzerland)  during this month and I found out that lots of people had common European identity and they didn't treat me as stranger even then when we didn't had any common language, where I saw people outside of Europe get much colder treatment.

I think that's the greatest achievement of the European Union, one that we unfortunately take for granted. We forget that just last century, Europe was being torn apart by nationalist sentiment. And yet now I, a Pole, can safely settle in Germany and be treated as one of Germans, thanks to the EU. The abolition of internal borders is also a step towards commonality.

 

So there is such thing as European identity, but it is not as strong as identity that people feel towards their own country, which is probably one main reasons why people object EU's development towards federation instead of union of independent countries. And I know that lots of EU opposition comes from our politicians that uses EU as explanation for many laws that have lots of opposition, even though truth is usually that those laws would have been made even without EU and EU's directives (which our politicians themselves were part of creating in first place) would have allowed versions that would have been much more liking of those people that opposite them.

 

So I would say that for most people it is not union of independent European nations that they opposite, but idea/fear that there is some alien entity that can overrule their country's decisions, which is the thing that most anti EU populist parties use in their campaigns and is therefore probably the thing that those parties actually don't want get rid of, as it would mean decrease of their popularity.

A lot of that is caused by ignorance. The European Union doesn't micromanage the legal process of individual countries, what it does is adopt framework acts, leaving the implementation of their goals to member states. If a politician passes a ****ty law and blames it on the EU, they count on the population being morons who don't know how the process works. Sadly, it's a fertile ground.

 

On the subject of common identity, I feel that the problem is that many people think that the European identity is supposed to supplant national identities, which is not the case. It is supposed to (or, at least, that's how I feel) to complement our national identities, much like federal German identity complements states' identities, or how U.S.' national identity complements that of individual states. (Lots of repetition there, my inner writer is cringing)

 

Personally, I consider myself both an European and a Pole. My country always existed in Europe and was never a separate part thereof. We have common values, common cultural roots stemming from religion and history, and we can cooperate together. The nationalist sentiment in EuroPa can be a threat, but only if they form an united front (somehow, English and French nationalists don't strike me as the most cooperative sort). Even then, the EPP (<3) will still control the majority of the Parliament, so we can safely say that the EU isn't going away anytime soon.

 

So I would say best thing for EU would be make its process better known and much more transparent, for example by broadcasting European Parliament's, Council of the European Union's and European Commission's sessions in TV and internet, and by advocating media outlets to reporting more about their decisions making. Because in my opinion biggest threat for EU is that people don't know how it works and mental image about cabinet decisions that are done behind closed doors.

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/ep-live/en/schedule

 

I agree that the EU needs to communicate more effectively. Mandatory civic education like in Finland can be a good step towards that. I tend to notice that the higher the education level, the more are people disinclined towards hammering the EU, though maybe it's just muh circles.

[Walsingham]

Sorry, man. But I don't think the EU is what's stopping Germans invading Poland again. 

 

I'd like to give the ordinary Germans in the street a bit more credit than that.

[Tagaziel]

Sorry, man. But I don't think the EU is what's stopping Germans invading Poland again. 

 

I'd like to give the ordinary Germans in the street a bit more credit than that.

Did I say that? No, I did not. The EU is a manifestation of the seminal changes brought upon by the continental trauma that was World War II and a further guarantee that we won't repeat the mistakes of the past. For reference, people also thought that the Great War was the war to end all wars and that ordinary Germans would not think about invading other countries again.

 

People will be stupid if they think they can get away with it.

[Hassat Hunter]

Because we haven't waged wars in Bosnia, Ukrain, Iraq, Afghanistan and probably more I forget...

 

So peaceful, that EU.

[Gorgon]

It's just an agreement not to bother waging war on oneanother because we have had enough. It's the smart thing. The rest of the world can benifit as well, just have entire generations die in pointless pursuits of Empire twice in a row. 

[213374U]

A lot of that is caused by ignorance. The European Union doesn't micromanage the legal process of individual countries, what it does is adopt framework acts, leaving the implementation of their goals to member states. If a politician passes a ****ty law and blames it on the EU, they count on the population being morons who don't know how the process works. Sadly, it's a fertile ground.

 

On the subject of common identity, I feel that the problem is that many people think that the European identity is supposed to supplant national identities, which is not the case. It is supposed to (or, at least, that's how I feel) to complement our national identities, much like federal German identity complements states' identities, or how U.S.' national identity complements that of individual states. (Lots of repetition there, my inner writer is cringing)

 

Why you insist on spreading this sort of misinformation is beyond me. It's either irony or malice at play that you blame it on ignorance and "the population being morons", seeing how, as evidenced by the Ukraine thread, you either don't know how the EU siphons sovereignty off member states and towards the Union structures or are, rather dishonestly, downplaying it. But I'm the FSB shill. Again, member states are obligated to:

 

• relinquish control over monetary policy once switching to the Euro (handled at the Union level by ECB) 
• acknowledge rulings and domestic ruling overturns by the ECJ and ECHR
• obey regulations and directives issued by the European Commission (secondary legislation, I'm sure you know what this is)
• fall in line with the common trading policy or face severe penalties

 

If that all sounds familiar, it's because you already read and glossed over it in the other thread. The structures and organisms responsible for the above are eminently undemocratic and suffer from transparency and accountability deficits. The argument that the EU doesn't micromanage countries is deceitful because what it does is hand out high level objectives for countries to legislate towards, and then sets deadlines for said legislation, leaving only the wording and execution up to member states, while monitoring both and penalizing any deviation from the directives issued.

 

It's not that people believe that some sort of EU nationality is in danger of supplanting whatever their passport currently reads—it's that they correctly surmise that the democratic process is being rendered increasingly irrelevant by the slow but sure transfer of power from their elected representatives to a supra-national organization they have no reason to trust and whose interests, motivations and inner workings are, at best, opaque.

Edited May 29, 2014 by 213374U

[BruceVC]

 

A lot of that is caused by ignorance. The European Union doesn't micromanage the legal process of individual countries, what it does is adopt framework acts, leaving the implementation of their goals to member states. If a politician passes a ****ty law and blames it on the EU, they count on the population being morons who don't know how the process works. Sadly, it's a fertile ground.

 

On the subject of common identity, I feel that the problem is that many people think that the European identity is supposed to supplant national identities, which is not the case. It is supposed to (or, at least, that's how I feel) to complement our national identities, much like federal German identity complements states' identities, or how U.S.' national identity complements that of individual states. (Lots of repetition there, my inner writer is cringing)

 

Why you insist on spreading this sort of misinformation is beyond me. It's either irony or malice at play that you blame it on ignorance and "the population being morons", seeing how, as evidenced by the Ukraine thread, you either don't know how the EU siphons sovereignty off member states and towards the Union structures or are, rather dishonestly, downplaying it. But I'm the FSB shill. Again, member states are obligated to:

 

• relinquish control over monetary policy once switching to the Euro (handled at the Union level by ECB) 
• acknowledge rulings and domestic ruling overturns by the ECJ and ECHR
• obey regulations and directives issued by the European Commission (secondary legislation, I'm sure you know what this is)
• fall in line with the common trading policy or face severe penalties

 

If that all sounds familiar, it's because you already read and glossed over it in the other thread. The structures and organisms responsible for the above are eminently undemocratic and suffer from transparency and accountability deficits. The argument that the EU doesn't micromanage countries is deceitful because what it does is hand out high level objectives for countries to legislate towards, and then sets deadlines for said legislation, leaving only the wording and execution up to member states, while monitoring both and penalizing any deviation from the directives issued.

 

It's not that people believe that some sort of EU nationality is in danger of supplanting whatever their passport currently reads—it's that they correctly surmise that the democratic process is being rendered increasingly irrelevant by the slow but sure transfer of power from their elected representatives to a supra-national organization they have no reason to trust and whose interests, motivations and inner workings are, at best, opaque.

 

 

2133 lets not bring up the Ukraine thread please, that thread devolved into one of the worst states that a discussion can end up at. And yes we were all guilty, I'm not blaming you.

 

What I don't understand is that countries like the UK and Poland are part of the EU but don't use the Euro internally, they have kept there currency. So how would that impact your point where you said "relinquish control over monetary policy once switching to the Euro (handled at the Union level by ECB'"

 

Surly the negative consequence of what you are saying wouldn't apply to countries that didn't switch to the Euro, or would it?

[Elerond]

 

A lot of that is caused by ignorance. The European Union doesn't micromanage the legal process of individual countries, what it does is adopt framework acts, leaving the implementation of their goals to member states. If a politician passes a ****ty law and blames it on the EU, they count on the population being morons who don't know how the process works. Sadly, it's a fertile ground.

 

On the subject of common identity, I feel that the problem is that many people think that the European identity is supposed to supplant national identities, which is not the case. It is supposed to (or, at least, that's how I feel) to complement our national identities, much like federal German identity complements states' identities, or how U.S.' national identity complements that of individual states. (Lots of repetition there, my inner writer is cringing)

 

Why you insist on spreading this sort of misinformation is beyond me. It's either irony or malice at play that you blame it on ignorance and "the population being morons", seeing how, as evidenced by the Ukraine thread, you either don't know how the EU siphons sovereignty off member states and towards the Union structures or are, rather dishonestly, downplaying it. But I'm the FSB shill. Again, member states are obligated to:

 

• relinquish control over monetary policy once switching to the Euro (handled at the Union level by ECB) 
• acknowledge rulings and domestic ruling overturns by the ECJ and ECHR
• obey regulations and directives issued by the European Commission (secondary legislation, I'm sure you know what this is)
• fall in line with the common trading policy or face severe penalties

 

If that all sounds familiar, it's because you already read and glossed over it in the other thread. The structures and organisms responsible for the above are eminently undemocratic and suffer from transparency and accountability deficits. The argument that the EU doesn't micromanage countries is deceitful because what it does is hand out high level objectives for countries to legislate towards, and then sets deadlines for said legislation, leaving only the wording and execution up to member states, while monitoring both and penalizing any deviation from the directives issued.

 

It's not that people believe that some sort of EU nationality is in danger of supplanting whatever their passport currently reads—it's that they correctly surmise that the democratic process is being rendered increasingly irrelevant by the slow but sure transfer of power from their elected representatives to a supra-national organization they have no reason to trust and whose interests, motivations and inner workings are, at best, opaque.

 

 

• Euro is not EU's currency, although original idea of Euro was that it would become such, but currently it hasn't and it more like Independent monetary union, with close tides with EU. Even though all EU's member states are members of EMU, only those countries that have been participated in European Exchange Rate Mechanism II, which is voluntary, for at least two years can adopt Euro as their currency. States outside of EU also can adopt Euro as their currency if they fulfill certain criteria. Currently there are several countries and territories outside EU that use Euro as their currency.
• ECHR is Council of Europe's court that is institute that is independent from EU and nearly all European countries are it's members. Decisions of national courts can't be appealed to ECJ. ECJ works as institute that determines how EU law should be interpret, but final decision is on national courts. ECJ also works as arbiter between EU's institutions.
• European Commission don't have power to issue regulations or directives, it only has power to make proposals for legislation, that Council of the European Union and European Parliament has to accept, if proposal is accepted it is Commission job to see that all member states obey it.
• EU is first and foremost trade union, so it should not come as surprise to any country that joins it that there is trade agreements that they have to obey if they want to be part of the union.   

Edited May 29, 2014 by Elerond

[Nepenthe]

 

 

A lot of that is caused by ignorance. The European Union doesn't micromanage the legal process of individual countries, what it does is adopt framework acts, leaving the implementation of their goals to member states. If a politician passes a ****ty law and blames it on the EU, they count on the population being morons who don't know how the process works. Sadly, it's a fertile ground.

On the subject of common identity, I feel that the problem is that many people think that the European identity is supposed to supplant national identities, which is not the case. It is supposed to (or, at least, that's how I feel) to complement our national identities, much like federal German identity complements states' identities, or how U.S.' national identity complements that of individual states. (Lots of repetition there, my inner writer is cringing)

 

 

Why you insist on spreading this sort of misinformation is beyond me. It's either irony or malice at play that you blame it on ignorance and "the population being morons", seeing how, as evidenced by the Ukraine thread, you either don't know how the EU siphons sovereignty off member states and towards the Union structures or are, rather dishonestly, downplaying it. But I'm the FSB shill. Again, member states are obligated to:

 

• relinquish control over monetary policy once switching to the Euro (handled at the Union level by ECB) 
• acknowledge rulings and domestic ruling overturns by the ECJ and ECHR
• obey regulations and directives issued by the European Commission (secondary legislation, I'm sure you know what this is)
• fall in line with the common trading policy or face severe penalties

 

If that all sounds familiar, it's because you already read and glossed over it in the other thread. The structures and organisms responsible for the above are eminently undemocratic and suffer from transparency and accountability deficits. The argument that the EU doesn't micromanage countries is deceitful because what it does is hand out high level objectives for countries to legislate towards, and then sets deadlines for said legislation, leaving only the wording and execution up to member states, while monitoring both and penalizing any deviation from the directives issued.

 

It's not that people believe that some sort of EU nationality is in danger of supplanting whatever their passport currently reads—it's that they correctly surmise that the democratic process is being rendered increasingly irrelevant by the slow but sure transfer of power from their elected representatives to a supra-national organization they have no reason to trust and whose interests, motivations and inner workings are, at best, opaque.

 

• Euro is not EU's currency, although original idea of Euro was that it would become such, but currently it hasn't and it more like Independent monetary union, with close tides with EU. Even though all EU's member states are members of EMU, only those countries that have been participated in European Exchange Rate Mechanism II, which is voluntary, for at least two years can adopt Euro as their currency. States outside of EU also can adopt Euro as their currency if they fulfill certain criteria. Currently there are several countries and territories outside EU that use Euro as their currency.
• ECHR is Council of Europe's court that is institute that is independent from EU and nearly all European countries are it's members. Decisions of national courts can't be appealed to ECJ. ECJ works as institute that determines how EU law should be interpret, but final decision is on national courts. ECJ also works as arbiter between EU's institutions.
• European Commission don't have power to issue regulations or directives, it only has power to make proposals for legislation, that Council of the European Union and European Parliament has to accept, if proposal is accepted it is Commission job to see that all member states obey it.
• EU is first and foremost trade union, so it should not come as surprise to any country that joins it that there is trade agreements that they have to obey if they want to be part of the union.   

Actually, an increasing amount of EU legislation leaves the "2nd level" to the Commission. Proposals, such as the data protection regulation when I was working on it, are absolutely rife with these openings for the Commission to legislate, meaning thatneither the member-states nor the EP has any say in the final product.

 

The activism of the EU Court is terrifying, not least in the legal uncertainty it creates. (See the test-achats case)

 

Additionally, directives (minimum harmonization with national implementation) are becoming rarer, with old directives being systematically replaced with directly applicable regulations.

[BruceVC]

 

 

A lot of that is caused by ignorance. The European Union doesn't micromanage the legal process of individual countries, what it does is adopt framework acts, leaving the implementation of their goals to member states. If a politician passes a ****ty law and blames it on the EU, they count on the population being morons who don't know how the process works. Sadly, it's a fertile ground.

 

On the subject of common identity, I feel that the problem is that many people think that the European identity is supposed to supplant national identities, which is not the case. It is supposed to (or, at least, that's how I feel) to complement our national identities, much like federal German identity complements states' identities, or how U.S.' national identity complements that of individual states. (Lots of repetition there, my inner writer is cringing)

 

Why you insist on spreading this sort of misinformation is beyond me. It's either irony or malice at play that you blame it on ignorance and "the population being morons", seeing how, as evidenced by the Ukraine thread, you either don't know how the EU siphons sovereignty off member states and towards the Union structures or are, rather dishonestly, downplaying it. But I'm the FSB shill. Again, member states are obligated to:

 

• relinquish control over monetary policy once switching to the Euro (handled at the Union level by ECB) 
• acknowledge rulings and domestic ruling overturns by the ECJ and ECHR
• obey regulations and directives issued by the European Commission (secondary legislation, I'm sure you know what this is)
• fall in line with the common trading policy or face severe penalties

 

If that all sounds familiar, it's because you already read and glossed over it in the other thread. The structures and organisms responsible for the above are eminently undemocratic and suffer from transparency and accountability deficits. The argument that the EU doesn't micromanage countries is deceitful because what it does is hand out high level objectives for countries to legislate towards, and then sets deadlines for said legislation, leaving only the wording and execution up to member states, while monitoring both and penalizing any deviation from the directives issued.

 

It's not that people believe that some sort of EU nationality is in danger of supplanting whatever their passport currently reads—it's that they correctly surmise that the democratic process is being rendered increasingly irrelevant by the slow but sure transfer of power from their elected representatives to a supra-national organization they have no reason to trust and whose interests, motivations and inner workings are, at best, opaque.

 

 

• Euro is not EU's currency, although original idea of Euro was that it would become such, but currently it hasn't and it more like Independent monetary union, with close tides with EU. Even though all EU's member states are members of EMU, only those countries that have been participated in European Exchange Rate Mechanism II, which is voluntary, for at least two years can adopt Euro as their currency. States outside of EU also can adopt Euro as their currency if they fulfill certain criteria. Currently there are several countries and territories outside EU that use Euro as their currency.
• ECHR is Council of Europe's court that is institute that is independent from EU and nearly all European countries are it's members. Decisions of national courts can't be appealed to ECJ. ECJ works as institute that determines how EU law should be interpret, but final decision is on national courts. ECJ also works as arbiter between EU's institutions.
• European Commission don't have power to issue regulations or directives, it only has power to make proposals for legislation, that Council of the European Union and European Parliament has to accept, if proposal is accepted it is Commission job to see that all member states obey it.
• EU is first and foremost trade union, so it should not come as surprise to any country that joins it that there is trade agreements that they have to obey if they want to be part of the union.   

 

 

Interesting post Elerond, thanks for sharing

What do you do for living, you know a lot about the structures of the EU

[Monte Carlo]

The EU Founders, and those that followed, were pretty transparent about their objectives: Ever-closer Union.

 

They haven't lied or obfuscated. They want a Federal Europe.

 

National governments are to blame as much, if not more, than the EU institutions. Their vainglorious lust for political validation, to be in the Big Boy's club, to be part of the supra-national and stateless elite has led them to wilfully lie to the people.

 

You reap what you sow.

[BruceVC]

The EU Founders, and those that followed, were pretty transparent about their objectives: Ever-closer Union.

 

They haven't lied or obfuscated. They want a Federal Europe.

 

National governments are to blame as much, if not more, than the EU institutions. Their vainglorious lust for political validation, to be in the Big Boy's club, to be part of the supra-national and stateless elite has led them to wilfully lie to the people.

 

You reap what you sow.

 

But to be fair the EU was the first union of its kind and on paper appeared to be the perfect economic and social construct. And for years it was the darling of the world, everyone use to talk about great the EU was...and it was great until the 2008 financial crisis and then the cracks appeared. For me the watershed moment that really challenged the invulnerability of the EU was when it became apparent how broken the Greek economy was  and that  they needed bailouts. I don't blame the EU for that. I believe Greece mislead the EU to become a member and utterly mismanaged many aspects of there economy

 

But for me I'll repeat what I said. I don't believe the EU can sustain itself in its current form due to the lack of identity many people feel towards it. So I expect some structural changes going forward

[Elerond]

 

 

 

 

A lot of that is caused by ignorance. The European Union doesn't micromanage the legal process of individual countries, what it does is adopt framework acts, leaving the implementation of their goals to member states. If a politician passes a ****ty law and blames it on the EU, they count on the population being morons who don't know how the process works. Sadly, it's a fertile ground.

On the subject of common identity, I feel that the problem is that many people think that the European identity is supposed to supplant national identities, which is not the case. It is supposed to (or, at least, that's how I feel) to complement our national identities, much like federal German identity complements states' identities, or how U.S.' national identity complements that of individual states. (Lots of repetition there, my inner writer is cringing)

 

Why you insist on spreading this sort of misinformation is beyond me. It's either irony or malice at play that you blame it on ignorance and "the population being morons", seeing how, as evidenced by the Ukraine thread, you either don't know how the EU siphons sovereignty off member states and towards the Union structures or are, rather dishonestly, downplaying it. But I'm the FSB shill. Again, member states are obligated to:

• relinquish control over monetary policy once switching to the Euro (handled at the Union level by ECB) 
• acknowledge rulings and domestic ruling overturns by the ECJ and ECHR
• obey regulations and directives issued by the European Commission (secondary legislation, I'm sure you know what this is)
• fall in line with the common trading policy or face severe penalties

If that all sounds familiar, it's because you already read and glossed over it in the other thread. The structures and organisms responsible for the above are eminently undemocratic and suffer from transparency and accountability deficits. The argument that the EU doesn't micromanage countries is deceitful because what it does is hand out high level objectives for countries to legislate towards, and then sets deadlines for said legislation, leaving only the wording and execution up to member states, while monitoring both and penalizing any deviation from the directives issued.

 

It's not that people believe that some sort of EU nationality is in danger of supplanting whatever their passport currently reads—it's that they correctly surmise that the democratic process is being rendered increasingly irrelevant by the slow but sure transfer of power from their elected representatives to a supra-national organization they have no reason to trust and whose interests, motivations and inner workings are, at best, opaque.

 

• Euro is not EU's currency, although original idea of Euro was that it would become such, but currently it hasn't and it more like Independent monetary union, with close tides with EU. Even though all EU's member states are members of EMU, only those countries that have been participated in European Exchange Rate Mechanism II, which is voluntary, for at least two years can adopt Euro as their currency. States outside of EU also can adopt Euro as their currency if they fulfill certain criteria. Currently there are several countries and territories outside EU that use Euro as their currency.
• ECHR is Council of Europe's court that is institute that is independent from EU and nearly all European countries are it's members. Decisions of national courts can't be appealed to ECJ. ECJ works as institute that determines how EU law should be interpret, but final decision is on national courts. ECJ also works as arbiter between EU's institutions.
• European Commission don't have power to issue regulations or directives, it only has power to make proposals for legislation, that Council of the European Union and European Parliament has to accept, if proposal is accepted it is Commission job to see that all member states obey it.
• EU is first and foremost trade union, so it should not come as surprise to any country that joins it that there is trade agreements that they have to obey if they want to be part of the union.   

 

Actually, an increasing amount of EU legislation leaves the "2nd level" to the Commission. Proposals, such as the data protection regulation when I was working on it, are absolutely rife with these openings for the Commission to legislate, meaning thatneither the member-states nor the EP has any say in the final product.

 

The activism of the EU Court is terrifying, not least in the legal uncertainty it creates. (See the test-achats case)

 

Additionally, directives (minimum harmonization with national implementation) are becoming rarer, with old directives being systematically replaced with directly applicable regulations.

 

 

In my understanding Lisbon Treaty (Article 290) removed comitology procedures and replaced them with more limited delegated acts (which gives for Commission rights to determine technical details that are seen as non-essential elements of the legislative act in limited scope, so that legislator can therefore concentrate on policy direction and objectives without entering into overly technical debates )  which both EP and Council can object if they see fit to do so. Although I don't have any first hand experience how things work in reality. 

 

Judicial activism is something that is hard to avoid in court systems, but at least it concentrate on invalidate legislation. Specifically about test-achats case,  one could argue that by invalidating directive at question court in effect also created new legislation, but in other hand one could argue that if directive did go against Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, as EDJ ruled, meaning that those legislation based on that directive shouldn't have existed in first place (of course in this case most of those legislations existed before said directive or adoption of said charter, which make things much more complicated), and therefore being quite excellent case for judicial activism.  

[Monte Carlo]

For me the watershed moment that really challenged the invulnerability of the EU was when it became apparent how broken the Greek economy was  and that  they needed bailouts. I don't blame the EU for that. I believe Greece mislead the EU to become a member and utterly mismanaged many aspects of there economy

 

 

With respect, you haven't got a clue what you're talking about. The beginning of the end was the day they agreed on the Euro and the entire institution fudged the entry criteria for the unproductive, borderline corrupt southern Club Med fringe.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Monte is right Bruce. Deal with it.

 

I'd argue that Greece adopting the Euro was shooting themselves in the leg economically. Seeing as their largest industry was tourism, adopting a stronger currency that they do not directly control was a ****wit move.

[Elerond]

 

 

 

 

A lot of that is caused by ignorance. The European Union doesn't micromanage the legal process of individual countries, what it does is adopt framework acts, leaving the implementation of their goals to member states. If a politician passes a ****ty law and blames it on the EU, they count on the population being morons who don't know how the process works. Sadly, it's a fertile ground.

 

On the subject of common identity, I feel that the problem is that many people think that the European identity is supposed to supplant national identities, which is not the case. It is supposed to (or, at least, that's how I feel) to complement our national identities, much like federal German identity complements states' identities, or how U.S.' national identity complements that of individual states. (Lots of repetition there, my inner writer is cringing)

 

Why you insist on spreading this sort of misinformation is beyond me. It's either irony or malice at play that you blame it on ignorance and "the population being morons", seeing how, as evidenced by the Ukraine thread, you either don't know how the EU siphons sovereignty off member states and towards the Union structures or are, rather dishonestly, downplaying it. But I'm the FSB shill. Again, member states are obligated to:

• relinquish control over monetary policy once switching to the Euro (handled at the Union level by ECB) 
• acknowledge rulings and domestic ruling overturns by the ECJ and ECHR
• obey regulations and directives issued by the European Commission (secondary legislation, I'm sure you know what this is)
• fall in line with the common trading policy or face severe penalties

If that all sounds familiar, it's because you already read and glossed over it in the other thread. The structures and organisms responsible for the above are eminently undemocratic and suffer from transparency and accountability deficits. The argument that the EU doesn't micromanage countries is deceitful because what it does is hand out high level objectives for countries to legislate towards, and then sets deadlines for said legislation, leaving only the wording and execution up to member states, while monitoring both and penalizing any deviation from the directives issued.

 

It's not that people believe that some sort of EU nationality is in danger of supplanting whatever their passport currently reads—it's that they correctly surmise that the democratic process is being rendered increasingly irrelevant by the slow but sure transfer of power from their elected representatives to a supra-national organization they have no reason to trust and whose interests, motivations and inner workings are, at best, opaque.

 

• Euro is not EU's currency, although original idea of Euro was that it would become such, but currently it hasn't and it more like Independent monetary union, with close tides with EU. Even though all EU's member states are members of EMU, only those countries that have been participated in European Exchange Rate Mechanism II, which is voluntary, for at least two years can adopt Euro as their currency. States outside of EU also can adopt Euro as their currency if they fulfill certain criteria. Currently there are several countries and territories outside EU that use Euro as their currency.
• ECHR is Council of Europe's court that is institute that is independent from EU and nearly all European countries are it's members. Decisions of national courts can't be appealed to ECJ. ECJ works as institute that determines how EU law should be interpret, but final decision is on national courts. ECJ also works as arbiter between EU's institutions.
• European Commission don't have power to issue regulations or directives, it only has power to make proposals for legislation, that Council of the European Union and European Parliament has to accept, if proposal is accepted it is Commission job to see that all member states obey it.
• EU is first and foremost trade union, so it should not come as surprise to any country that joins it that there is trade agreements that they have to obey if they want to be part of the union.   

 

 

Interesting post Elerond, thanks for sharing

What do you do for living, you know a lot about the structures of the EU

 

 

I work as an usability specialist for larger software company, even though that my work should have little to do with politics, there has been government contracts for EU specific web-portals. But I liked civic classes in school and I try to keep myself updated on how our government and EU works, so most of my knowledge comes from reading it from internet , which means that my knowledge probably has large holes in it.

Edited May 29, 2014 by Elerond

[BruceVC]

 

For me the watershed moment that really challenged the invulnerability of the EU was when it became apparent how broken the Greek economy was  and that  they needed bailouts. I don't blame the EU for that. I believe Greece mislead the EU to become a member and utterly mismanaged many aspects of there economy

 

 

With respect, you haven't got a clue what you're talking about. The beginning of the end was the day they agreed on the Euro and the entire institution fudged the entry criteria for the unproductive, borderline corrupt southern Club Med fringe.

 

 

 

Monte is right Bruce. Deal with it.

 

I'd argue that Greece adopting the Euro was shooting themselves in the leg economically. Seeing as their largest industry was tourism, adopting a stronger currency that they do not directly control was a ****wit move.

 

Sorry boys I don't agree, Greece was the real beginning of the decline 

[BruceVC]

 

 

 

 

 

A lot of that is caused by ignorance. The European Union doesn't micromanage the legal process of individual countries, what it does is adopt framework acts, leaving the implementation of their goals to member states. If a politician passes a ****ty law and blames it on the EU, they count on the population being morons who don't know how the process works. Sadly, it's a fertile ground.

 

On the subject of common identity, I feel that the problem is that many people think that the European identity is supposed to supplant national identities, which is not the case. It is supposed to (or, at least, that's how I feel) to complement our national identities, much like federal German identity complements states' identities, or how U.S.' national identity complements that of individual states. (Lots of repetition there, my inner writer is cringing)

 

Why you insist on spreading this sort of misinformation is beyond me. It's either irony or malice at play that you blame it on ignorance and "the population being morons", seeing how, as evidenced by the Ukraine thread, you either don't know how the EU siphons sovereignty off member states and towards the Union structures or are, rather dishonestly, downplaying it. But I'm the FSB shill. Again, member states are obligated to:

• relinquish control over monetary policy once switching to the Euro (handled at the Union level by ECB) 
• acknowledge rulings and domestic ruling overturns by the ECJ and ECHR
• obey regulations and directives issued by the European Commission (secondary legislation, I'm sure you know what this is)
• fall in line with the common trading policy or face severe penalties

If that all sounds familiar, it's because you already read and glossed over it in the other thread. The structures and organisms responsible for the above are eminently undemocratic and suffer from transparency and accountability deficits. The argument that the EU doesn't micromanage countries is deceitful because what it does is hand out high level objectives for countries to legislate towards, and then sets deadlines for said legislation, leaving only the wording and execution up to member states, while monitoring both and penalizing any deviation from the directives issued.

 

It's not that people believe that some sort of EU nationality is in danger of supplanting whatever their passport currently reads—it's that they correctly surmise that the democratic process is being rendered increasingly irrelevant by the slow but sure transfer of power from their elected representatives to a supra-national organization they have no reason to trust and whose interests, motivations and inner workings are, at best, opaque.

 

• Euro is not EU's currency, although original idea of Euro was that it would become such, but currently it hasn't and it more like Independent monetary union, with close tides with EU. Even though all EU's member states are members of EMU, only those countries that have been participated in European Exchange Rate Mechanism II, which is voluntary, for at least two years can adopt Euro as their currency. States outside of EU also can adopt Euro as their currency if they fulfill certain criteria. Currently there are several countries and territories outside EU that use Euro as their currency.
• ECHR is Council of Europe's court that is institute that is independent from EU and nearly all European countries are it's members. Decisions of national courts can't be appealed to ECJ. ECJ works as institute that determines how EU law should be interpret, but final decision is on national courts. ECJ also works as arbiter between EU's institutions.
• European Commission don't have power to issue regulations or directives, it only has power to make proposals for legislation, that Council of the European Union and European Parliament has to accept, if proposal is accepted it is Commission job to see that all member states obey it.
• EU is first and foremost trade union, so it should not come as surprise to any country that joins it that there is trade agreements that they have to obey if they want to be part of the union.   

 

 

Interesting post Elerond, thanks for sharing

What do you do for living, you know a lot about the structures of the EU

 

 

I work as an usability specialist for larger software company, even though that my work should have little to do with politics, there has been government contracts for EU specific web-portals. But I liked civic classes in school and I try to keep myself updated on how our government and EU works, so most of my knowledge comes from reading it from internet , which means that my knowledge probably has large holes in it.

 

 

Well I find your perspective very interesting, so keep it up

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

 

 

For me the watershed moment that really challenged the invulnerability of the EU was when it became apparent how broken the Greek economy was  and that  they needed bailouts. I don't blame the EU for that. I believe Greece mislead the EU to become a member and utterly mismanaged many aspects of there economy

 

 

With respect, you haven't got a clue what you're talking about. The beginning of the end was the day they agreed on the Euro and the entire institution fudged the entry criteria for the unproductive, borderline corrupt southern Club Med fringe.

 

 

Monte is right Bruce. Deal with it.

I'd argue that Greece adopting the Euro was shooting themselves in the leg economically. Seeing as their largest industry was tourism, adopting a stronger currency that they do not directly control was a ****wit move.

 

 

Sorry boys I don't agree, Greece was the real beginning of the decline 

Scary thing about reality is that you don't have to agree with it for it to be true.

[BruceVC]

 

 

 

For me the watershed moment that really challenged the invulnerability of the EU was when it became apparent how broken the Greek economy was  and that  they needed bailouts. I don't blame the EU for that. I believe Greece mislead the EU to become a member and utterly mismanaged many aspects of there economy

 

With respect, you haven't got a clue what you're talking about. The beginning of the end was the day they agreed on the Euro and the entire institution fudged the entry criteria for the unproductive, borderline corrupt southern Club Med fringe.

 

 

Monte is right Bruce. Deal with it.

I'd argue that Greece adopting the Euro was shooting themselves in the leg economically. Seeing as their largest industry was tourism, adopting a stronger currency that they do not directly control was a ****wit move.

 

Sorry boys I don't agree, Greece was the real beginning of the decline 

Scary thing about reality is that you don't have to agree with it for it to be true.

 

Its not that I don't believe Monte and you but I would prefer to get few other opinions, you understand of course. Its just the most sensible way to end the debate

[Nepenthe]

 

 

 

 

 

 

A lot of that is caused by ignorance. The European Union doesn't micromanage the legal process of individual countries, what it does is adopt framework acts, leaving the implementation of their goals to member states. If a politician passes a ****ty law and blames it on the EU, they count on the population being morons who don't know how the process works. Sadly, it's a fertile ground.

On the subject of common identity, I feel that the problem is that many people think that the European identity is supposed to supplant national identities, which is not the case. It is supposed to (or, at least, that's how I feel) to complement our national identities, much like federal German identity complements states' identities, or how U.S.' national identity complements that of individual states. (Lots of repetition there, my inner writer is cringing)

 

 

Why you insist on spreading this sort of misinformation is beyond me. It's either irony or malice at play that you blame it on ignorance and "the population being morons", seeing how, as evidenced by the Ukraine thread, you either don't know how the EU siphons sovereignty off member states and towards the Union structures or are, rather dishonestly, downplaying it. But I'm the FSB shill. Again, member states are obligated to:

• relinquish control over monetary policy once switching to the Euro (handled at the Union level by ECB) 
• acknowledge rulings and domestic ruling overturns by the ECJ and ECHR
• obey regulations and directives issued by the European Commission (secondary legislation, I'm sure you know what this is)
• fall in line with the common trading policy or face severe penalties

If that all sounds familiar, it's because you already read and glossed over it in the other thread. The structures and organisms responsible for the above are eminently undemocratic and suffer from transparency and accountability deficits. The argument that the EU doesn't micromanage countries is deceitful because what it does is hand out high level objectives for countries to legislate towards, and then sets deadlines for said legislation, leaving only the wording and execution up to member states, while monitoring both and penalizing any deviation from the directives issued.

 

It's not that people believe that some sort of EU nationality is in danger of supplanting whatever their passport currently reads—it's that they correctly surmise that the democratic process is being rendered increasingly irrelevant by the slow but sure transfer of power from their elected representatives to a supra-national organization they have no reason to trust and whose interests, motivations and inner workings are, at best, opaque.

• Euro is not EU's currency, although original idea of Euro was that it would become such, but currently it hasn't and it more like Independent monetary union, with close tides with EU. Even though all EU's member states are members of EMU, only those countries that have been participated in European Exchange Rate Mechanism II, which is voluntary, for at least two years can adopt Euro as their currency. States outside of EU also can adopt Euro as their currency if they fulfill certain criteria. Currently there are several countries and territories outside EU that use Euro as their currency.
• ECHR is Council of Europe's court that is institute that is independent from EU and nearly all European countries are it's members. Decisions of national courts can't be appealed to ECJ. ECJ works as institute that determines how EU law should be interpret, but final decision is on national courts. ECJ also works as arbiter between EU's institutions.
• European Commission don't have power to issue regulations or directives, it only has power to make proposals for legislation, that Council of the European Union and European Parliament has to accept, if proposal is accepted it is Commission job to see that all member states obey it.
• EU is first and foremost trade union, so it should not come as surprise to any country that joins it that there is trade agreements that they have to obey if they want to be part of the union.   

 

Actually, an increasing amount of EU legislation leaves the "2nd level" to the Commission. Proposals, such as the data protection regulation when I was working on it, are absolutely rife with these openings for the Commission to legislate, meaning thatneither the member-states nor the EP has any say in the final product.

The activism of the EU Court is terrifying, not least in the legal uncertainty it creates. (See the test-achats case)

Additionally, directives (minimum harmonization with national implementation) are becoming rarer, with old directives being systematically replaced with directly applicable regulations.

 

In my understanding Lisbon Treaty (Article 290) removed comitology procedures and replaced them with more limited delegated acts (which gives for Commission rights to determine technical details that are seen as non-essential elements of the legislative act in limited scope, so that legislator can therefore concentrate on policy direction and objectives without entering into overly technical debates )  which both EP and Council can object if they see fit to do so. Although I don't have any first hand experience how things work in reality. 

 

Judicial activism is something that is hard to avoid in court systems, but at least it concentrate on invalidate legislation. Specifically about test-achats case,  one could argue that by invalidating directive at question court in effect also created new legislation, but in other hand one could argue that if directive did go against Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, as EDJ ruled, meaning that those legislation based on that directive shouldn't have existed in first place (of course in this case most of those legislations existed before said directive or adoption of said charter, which make things much more complicated), and therefore being quite excellent case for judicial activism.

Yeah, that's the theory re: technical standards and delegated acts. Practice, as always when it comes to legislation, no matter the country or federation, is something else. There is so much goin on at the EU, do you really think the EP and council can keep abreast of what the Commission doeswithin its own powers (unless lobbyists tell them....)

 

Putting people in a different position based on sex is still universally accepted (only Sweden has maternity leave for bith men and women). Insurance is based on using all available information re: client and pricing the risks based on that information. Reducing information makes the risks go up, makes the price go up. Thus, test-achats made the insurance prices go up for almost everybody (apart from a few risk groups) due to the amount if useable info going down. Imo one of the best examples of do-goodyism biting everybody, including its targets, in the ass.