[sunaookami]

Plus the undemocratic law making process and the unelected EU commission that is an authoritarian institution without anyone keeping it in check. The DSA is a censorship law with an added backdoor (look up "emergency response" and its implications). And tethered caps are just annoying ;)

[tugu77]

That's a lot of BS.

The European Parliament is elected every few years by citizens in all member states.

The European Commission is nominated by the European Council and and confirmed by the European Parliament.

The European Council consists of government officials from the member states where they have been chosen by national democratic processes.

It may be a little complicated, but it's all rooted in democratic processes. Please stick to the facts and keep the populistic anti-EU nationalistic propaganda to yourself.

(Every kid in the EU has been learning those basic facts in school for decades, making it surprising that this populist nonsense still catches on with so many people. I have an easier time forgivin non-EU folks, but even those should check the facts before claiming things.)

[cbeach]

> The European Commission is nominated by the European Council and and confirmed by the European Parliament.

> The European Council consists of government officials from the member states where they have been chosen by national democratic processes.

I disagree. Successful elected government officials from member states aren't governing the EU Commission and Council. They're governing their own member states, where they are elected by the public.

Unpopular, unsuccessful ex-government officials from member states are governing the EU, where they are appointed by bureaucrats.

Just look at the uninspiring Commissioners we've suffered over the last few years.

It's telling that the Von Der Leyen Commission scraped in with just 51.4% of MEP votes.

https://facts4eu.org/news/2024_dec_unpopular_eu_I

In her home country Germany, only 33% said she'd make a good Commission president.

https://www.politico.eu/article/most-germans-skeptical-of-ur...

[lispm]

> Unpopular, unsuccessful ex-government officials from member states are governing the EU, where they are appointed by bureaucrats.

Von der Leyen was not appointed by bureaucrats.

> It's telling that the Von Der Leyen Commission scraped in with just 51.4% of MEP votes.

That's nothing special in European voting systems. Various governments (regional or country wide) in Germany have small, but relatively stable majorities provided by coalitions. That's very different to the mostly two-party systems in the US or the UK.

[lmm]

> Von der Leyen was not appointed by bureaucrats.

It's not clear who specifically did the ceremonial nomination, but it was probably the CDU bureaucracy that made the decision.

[lispm]

The "CDU bureaucracy" ? What is that? The CDU is a political party.

Generally about the appointment of the commission:

https://commission.europa.eu/about/organisation/how-commissi...

[lmm]

> The "CDU bureaucracy" ? What is that? The CDU is a political party.

Right, and like most large organisations it has a bureaucracy.

> Generally about the appointment of the commission

Right, note the vague "suggestions from member states". (Also note that the claimed accountability points have never been activated in practice)

[tugu77]

51.4% is a majority. You are free to disagree again, but that won't change the facts. You can just as easily disagree about gravity, evolution or climate change. Still won't change them.

Look, I don't like lots of things about the EU either. But the first step to being able to change sth is to acknowledge the facts. Claiming that von der Leyen wasn't democratically appointed is similar to Trump claiming the 2020 election was stolen. Not a great start.

[cbeach]

> democratically appointed

Now there's an oxymoron if ever I saw one!

Where democracy is involved, we use the word "elected" -- not "appointed"

[dfawcus]

That was always one of the issues with EU, and EEC before it, membership in the UK. There was no education as to the change in constitutional status, nor explanation of how the EEC (then EU) actually worked.

Most folks still had the view that UK Parliament was in charge, not really appreciating the change. That also applied to our MPs, hence the Factomane cases.

Now if there had bee proper education in the UK as to the impact of EEC and EU membership, possibly Brexit would not have happened.

[vixen99]

Sadly this 'populist nonsense' has even infected some prominent public intellectuals. Doubtless your comment will put them straight.

https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/crisis-behind-the-euroc...

From Chapter 6: 'The Inherently Undemocratic EU Democracy'

'A number of prominent public intellectuals put pen to paper to warn not only of a crisis of European democracy, but of a crisis of the very ‘political institution’ of democracy, and particularly its representative and liberal variants. Contemporary manifestations of the ‘hollowing out’ of democracy following the Eurocrisis have taken many forms and several contributions in this volume have dealt with various aspects of the phenomenon.'

' .... a crisis of the EU’s own democratic credentials. Even as they insisted on its purely economic character, commentators were quick to criticise the undemocratic form that the emergency EMU-related responses to the Eurocrisis came to assume, particularly at the European level, where not only parliamentary processes, but also the Treaties’ legal prescriptions, were systematically circumvented'.

[tugu77]

The EU has certainly its issues, no doubt about it. They need to be pointed out and addressed for sure. We are not in disagreement there.

But the flat out denial that EU is in principle a democratic system is just a too simplistic view. It tends to be mostly touted by those populists who ultimately would like to see an authocratic state with themselves in charge.

[izacus]

I think it makes a lot more sense that there's a lot of (especially rich people and US folks) that desperately want EU to fail - either because they're deeply nationalist, see a profit motive or just hate foreigners.

Those will craft narratives that are patently untrue to drive their agenda.

[RandomThoughts3]

The council, composed of representatives of governments elected in their own state, nominates the commission and proposes laws which are then voted by the parliament where deputies who have been directly elected by European sit. The parliament also confirms the commission.

Care to explain how any of that is undemocratic?

[lmm]

The commissioners are appointed by their party - often the decisions are made by people who are not even directly elected themselves - and as such have no real accountability to the public. MEPs are slightly better but the overwhelming majority of them are "elected" via a party list system, which means that any individual can much more easily get elected by being popular with party bureaucrats than by being popular with the public that they supposedly represent. (But since the MEPs can't write laws, only vote on laws written by the commision, they're pretty irrelevant anyway).

Even an extremely unpopular commissioner is at no risk of being voted out. For many years the UK's representative was disgraced former disgraced former MP Peter *Mandelson, one of the most hated people in the country, who could never have won any remotely democratic contest.

[arrowsmith]

Peter Mandelson*. Recently back in the headlines as he was just appointed as US ambassador.

I think it’s a stretch to call Mandelson “one of the most hated people in the country”. What did he do exactly? By this point I’m sure the average person has mostly forgotten that he exists.

You are right, however, about the lack of real democratic accountability in the EU. The EU commission is the place to “fail up” - it’s where politicians go after their democratic viability has run out at home and the voters boot them out.

[lmm]

> I think it’s a stretch to call Mandelson “one of the most hated people in the country”. What did he do exactly?

He had at least the image of a slimeball "spin doctor", seen as having control over the media and using it to control the narrative and cover up government wrongdoing. He was definitely publicly hated even before it emerged that he'd taken a bribe^Wundeclared interest-free loan from a person he was responsible for investigating. You're right that he's mostly forgotten nowadays.

[RandomThoughts3]

> The commissioners are appointed by their party

Commissioners are proposed by their country and discussed with the head of the commission (which was selected by the whole European council) before being validated by the parliamentary committee in charge of its portfolio (composed of MEPs which are elected using direct universal suffrage and proportional representation (you can hardly be more democratic than that).

I understand that you have had issue in the past with the UK pick as commissioner. Sadly the UK uses first past the post election and has a party-chosen prime minister. I would thank you for not projecting the results of the poor democratic system used by your country on the Union in the future.

[lmm]

> Commissioners are proposed by their country

Well, no, they're proposed by the government of their country. Which generally means they're selected by the ruling party in that country.

> I understand that you have had issue in the past with the UK pick as commissioner. Sadly the UK uses first past the post election and has a party-chosen prime minister. I would thank you for not projecting the results of the poor democratic system used by your country on the Union in the future.

Huh? Party list systems (which is what alternatives to FPTP tend to boil down to) redouble the problem - you lose democratic accountability even at that lower level.

[RandomThoughts3]

> Well, no, they're proposed by the government of their country.

Yes, that’s how democracy works. Countries have elected governments.

> Party list systems (which is what alternatives to FPTP tend to boil down to)

Huh? It’s a proportional system and everyone is free to present their own list if they disagree with the existing organisation presenting lists. The fact that you can’t be bothered to take part in the political life of your country is not magically a loss of democratic accountability.

[lmm]

> It’s a proportional system and everyone is free to present their own list if they disagree with the existing organisation presenting lists.

This is one of those "the law in its majestic equality" things. It's not practically possible to compete with the full-time political parties without being a full-time political party. And a society that separates its politicians from its people is as bad as that quote about separating its scholars from its warriors.

> The fact that you can’t be bothered to take part in the political life of your country

I get involved, more at a local level, but at a national level I vote, and occasionally I write to my MP - who is a named individual representing a fairly small number of people who can therefore actually hold him accountable. Piss off your constituents enough and it doesn't matter how much the party likes you. Which is a system I'm very happy with, and something that's deeply missing from the EU.

[kukkeliskuu]

Not OP, but for starters, the referendum in my country about joining EU did not ask whether we should give our independence away to the EU. If people would have been told the actual goal, the referendum would have probably never passed. The EU is not a legitimate democracy.