European Union wins Nobel Peace Prize

[Nazis in Space]

Everyone with half a brain who recognises that the committee 1. explicitly included the EU's predecessors, right down to the Montanunion, in this, and 2. everyone who realises that the immense and unprecedented level of economic integration the EU is fundamentally based on (What with starting as such) is what both, fuelled the ludicrous level of prosperity within the EU (Relative to what it had previous to it, nevermind the rest of the planet), and made wars between its two-dozen members with a history of murdering the shit out of each other a ludicrous proposition on account of destroying this remarkably useful economic integration.

Then I suppose the people whose predictions about this crisis have been right so far have a full brain, and not half a brain. Does explain the look on Guy Verhofstadt's face when he Hitlers (no, really, check the link at the bottom) his way through European Parliament. Regardless, my issue is that this antidemocratic political union is taking credit for something that can only, using some very creative thinking, be attributed to something that amounted to little more than a trade deal. Right until the 1970s/1980s, there wasn't a lot of European Union. After that, something that coincided with slowed-down economic growth and a rise in dissatisfaction on all fronts, they tried to push through more and more restrictive political legislation, and the thing is now on the verge of collapse.

I really don't want these unelected bureaucrats, who are currently carrying out destructive policies based on objectively-false predictions, to take any credit for peace.
For the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KNMi8wI-enM
Edit: another one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3XZJ4znl00

Please explain to me how the EU is undemocratic.

The European Council consists of the heads of state/ government - which you elected.

The Council of the European Union consists of the ministers with the relevant portfolia of the memberstates - elected indirectly as they're appointed by the winning parties and negotiated in coalition-negotiations. They're held accountable via elections (Via their parties' results therein), the whole system is identical to the one used in your national elections.

The European Parliament is voted for directly, proportional representation, split by nation. Again, quite democratic.

The European Commission is, indeed, not directly elected, but its size and powers are more indicative of cabinet-level than parliamentary positions - and it is elected in a similar fashion, by the European Parliament, which you'll remember is voted for directly by the electorate. Complaining about it being undemocratic is rather like complaining about your country's cabinet being undemocratic because the ministers were suggested by the head of government, and elected by the parliament.

I'm afraid that 'The EU isn't democratic!!!11oneoneone' soundbites are rather disengaged from reality.

[Antrema]

So, as I said, you don't see war in Europe.

No war in Europe OK, let me think...Northern Ireland, Bosnia, Kosovo, Croatia, Invasion of Cyprus? And there was no war in Europe from 1945-1991 due to the presence of US and British troops under NATO plus weapons capable of producing a fraction of the sun's radiation, light and heat

"Dictatorship". Happy to see you're not constrained by reality.

The EU is a political project started in the 1950s as the European Coal and Steel Community, an Anglo-Bosche project, no surprises there even though the goal has been practiced before that date. Another thing to remember is that the ECJ have no respect for English Common Law, and EU Commissioners have immunity from prosecution.

It is indeed. The fact that the system is flawed doesn't change that.
Really? So what interests of the UK have been protected? And what are the mutual interests of the member states? The only boundary we have is with the Paddies, and I don't see that being erased anytime soon

Because the people saw it was in their interests to not only develop democratic societies - which was made a condition for membership after a while - but also because of the economic benefits they would reap as members of the organization. So yeah, the EU has played an important part.

So £94 billion a year to the EU is a good price to pay? Especially when some of the member countrie's claims to democracy in the past 100 years are suspect?

The people don't see the European Union as their interest.

Doesn't change the fact that it is.

I see the EU as a threat to the interests of national security

The cosmopolitan political elite - those support the European Union's daft policies.

Like "trade" and "capitalism"?

Better than VAT and socialism. At the end of the day I'd be more than happy to give Idi Amin the Nobel Prize for Peace than the EU

[Gravlen]

I'm afraid that 'The EU isn't democratic!!!11oneoneone' soundbites are rather disengaged from reality.

Well he is calling the EU a "dictatorship"...

[Nazis in Space]

I think your diagnosis is - and I'll use the latin phrase - spot on, Doctor.

Like some how there were no periods of peace in Europe.
Post Napoleonic period anyone ?
You have a few civil wars and Russia vs Turkey.

Not counting the hilarious number of civil wars (Which the EU also helped to curb by essentially forcing increasing standards of minority rights), and cutting off at the formation of the German Empire, we've...

France vs. Spain
Russia vs. Turkey
Prussia vs. Denmark (x 2)
Italian States vs. Austria
France vs. Austria
France & Britain vs Russia (We can exclude this one for including a country that is not a modern EU member, nor was absorbed by one that is an EU member)
Prussia vs. Austria
France vs. Germany.

Over a 55-year period.

Over the 55 years from the formation of the Montan Union in 1951 until 2006, there've been the following international wars between member nations of the EU and its legal predecessors:

-

Or post WWII, pre Maastricht Treaty ?
You have 19 years of EU peace preceded by 48 years post WWII peace.

Montanunion explicitly included. That's six years post-WW2, when everyone was still rebuilding.

[Of the Free Socialist Territories]

So, as I said, you don't see war in Europe.

No war in Europe OK, let me think...Northern Ireland, Bosnia, Kosovo, Croatia, Invasion of Cyprus? And there was no war in Europe from 1945-1991 due to the presence of US and British troops under NATO plus weapons capable of producing a fraction of the sun's radiation, light and heat

How many of those countries were within the EU, which is the point being made?

"Dictatorship". Happy to see you're not constrained by reality.

The EU is a political project started in the 1950s as the European Coal and Steel Community, an Anglo-Bosche project, no surprises there even though the goal has been practiced before that date. Another thing to remember is that the ECJ have no respect for English Common Law, and EU Commissioners have immunity from prosecution.

France was a founding member of the ECSC, along with Italy. The UK didn't join until 1973, when it was the EEC. I don't see your point.

It is indeed. The fact that the system is flawed doesn't change that.

Really? So what interests of the UK have been protected? And what are the mutual interests of the member states? The only boundary we have is with the Paddies, and I don't see that being erased anytime soon

What are you trying to say?

So £94 billion a year to the EU is a good price to pay? Especially when some of the member countrie's claims to democracy in the past 100 years are suspect?

Were they suspect at the time of joining the EU? No. Thought not.

I see the EU as a threat to the interests of national security

Please explain.

Like "trade" and "capitalism"?

Better than VAT and socialism. At the end of the day I'd be more than happy to give Idi Amin the Nobel Prize for Peace than the EU

Ah, another "The EU is socialist ARGH" post.

[Gravlen]

So, as I said, you don't see war in Europe.

No war in Europe OK, let me think...Northern Ireland,

No war.

Bosnia, Kosovo, Croatia,

Not member states of the union and its forerunners.

Invasion of Cyprus?

Happened several years before Cyprus became a member state.

And there was no war in Europe from 1945-1991 due to the presence of US and British troops under NATO plus weapons capable of producing a fraction of the sun's radiation, light and heat

Good thing nobody has implied that the EU was the sole reason for peace in Europe, innit?

[Nazis in Space]

No war in Europe OK, let me think...Northern Ireland, Bosnia, Kosovo, Croatia, Invasion of Cyprus? And there was no war in Europe from 1945-1991 due to the presence of US and British troops under NATO plus weapons capable of producing a fraction of the sun's radiation, light and heat

How many of those countries were within the EU, which is the point being made?

The Greece/ Cyprus/ Turkey shenanigans is a pretty good example of what happens when you're

• In NATO
• Nuclear Weapons exist
• There's a big bad Soviet Union right next door
• No EU or its predecessors involved

oops

[Rubiconic Crossings V2 rev 1f]

I believe its called Cognitive Dissonance.

I think your diagnosis is - and I'll use the latin phrase - spot on, Doctor.

No. Cognitive Dissonance is having two (or more) fundamentally opposed ideas reconciled in ones belief system.

[Gravlen]

I think your diagnosis is - and I'll use the latin phrase - spot on, Doctor.

No. Cognitive Dissonance is having two (or more) fundamentally opposed ideas reconciled in ones belief system.

I knew I should have studied latin...

Next you'll tell me he's not even a doctor!

[Ostroeuropa]

Germany, France, and UK agree to stop murdering everybody.
Win an award.

"Omg, the germans are trying to become important!"
"Omg, let's killem."

all 3-
"Omg, the russians and americans are important now, we'd better stop killing eachother."

[Rubiconic Crossings V2 rev 1f]

No. Cognitive Dissonance is having two (or more) fundamentally opposed ideas reconciled in ones belief system.

I knew I should have studied latin...

Next you'll tell me he's not even a doctor!

Doctor of luuurve? Who knew?

[ArghNeedAName]

Then I suppose the people whose predictions about this crisis have been right so far have a full brain, and not half a brain. Does explain the look on Guy Verhofstadt's face when he Hitlers (no, really, check the link at the bottom) his way through European Parliament. Regardless, my issue is that this antidemocratic political union is taking credit for something that can only, using some very creative thinking, be attributed to something that amounted to little more than a trade deal. Right until the 1970s/1980s, there wasn't a lot of European Union. After that, something that coincided with slowed-down economic growth and a rise in dissatisfaction on all fronts, they tried to push through more and more restrictive political legislation, and the thing is now on the verge of collapse.

I really don't want these unelected bureaucrats, who are currently carrying out destructive policies based on objectively-false predictions, to take any credit for peace.
For the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KNMi8wI-enM
Edit: another one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3XZJ4znl00

Please explain to me how the EU is undemocratic.

The European Council consists of the heads of state/ government - which you elected.

The Council of the European Union consists of the ministers with the relevant portfolia of the memberstates - elected indirectly as they're appointed by the winning parties and negotiated in coalition-negotiations. They're held accountable via elections (Via their parties' results therein), the whole system is identical to the one used in your national elections.

The European Parliament is voted for directly, proportional representation, split by nation. Again, quite democratic.

The European Commission is, indeed, not directly elected, but its size and powers are more indicative of cabinet-level than parliamentary positions - and it is elected in a similar fashion, by the European Parliament, which you'll remember is voted for directly by the electorare. Complaining about it being undemocratic is rather like complaining about your country's cabinet being undemocratic because the ministers were suggested by the head of government, and elected by the parliament.

I'm afraid that 'The EU isn't democratic!!!11oneoneone' soundbites are rather disengaged from reality.

Such criticisms can often be badly worded, though Vaclav Klaus, the president of the Czech Republic often sums it up well. Essentially, the EU doesn't function as a parliamentary system - not even like the "Polder model". Elections to the European Parliament have no real clout. Did the 2009 parliamentary elections really make a difference to how the EU was governed? Will Barroso, Van Rompuy or Schulz have to work hard to do their job successfully because they fear the 2014 elections will cost them their jobs? Will people like us have any influence over who fends up in charge of the European institutions? No, the elections won't change much; I expect eurosceptic parties will make some gains but the majority of MEPs elected will largely support continuing the policies and keeping them in office.

[Antrema]

Do tell, how does the EU destroy culture?

It destroys The original countries culture and replaces it with trashculture

You must be of the left wing, if so as a Helmerist socialist why are you opposed to the EU?

[Nazis in Space]

Please explain to me how the EU is undemocratic.

The European Council consists of the heads of state/ government - which you elected.

The Council of the European Union consists of the ministers with the relevant portfolia of the memberstates - elected indirectly as they're appointed by the winning parties and negotiated in coalition-negotiations. They're held accountable via elections (Via their parties' results therein), the whole system is identical to the one used in your national elections.

The European Parliament is voted for directly, proportional representation, split by nation. Again, quite democratic.

The European Commission is, indeed, not directly elected, but its size and powers are more indicative of cabinet-level than parliamentary positions - and it is elected in a similar fashion, by the European Parliament, which you'll remember is voted for directly by the electorare. Complaining about it being undemocratic is rather like complaining about your country's cabinet being undemocratic because the ministers were suggested by the head of government, and elected by the parliament.

I'm afraid that 'The EU isn't democratic!!!11oneoneone' soundbites are rather disengaged from reality.

Such criticisms can often be badly worded, though Vaclav Klaus, the president of the Czech Republic often sums it up well. Essentially, the EU doesn't function as a parliamentary system - not even like the "Polder model". Elections to the European Parliament have no real clout. Did the 2009 parliamentary elections really make a difference to how the EU was governed? Will Barroso, Van Rompuy or Schulz have to work hard to do their job successfully because they fear the 2014 elections will cost them their jobs? Will people like us have any influence over who fends up in charge of the European institutions? No, the elections won't change much; I expect eurosceptic parties will make some gains but the majority of MEPs elected will largely support continuing the policies and keeping them in office.

Rather debatable. It's true that relatively few people care about the EU parliament elections, and it's likewise true that they tend to largely toe the line their national governments and the institutions they occupy (The councils) provide. This is a bad thing, I'm not arguing that - though I'd very much argue that this isn't so much because the parliament is dependent on these institutions, but rather because it is filled with idealists who wish to advance the EU at all costs, even if the short-term benefits risk being long-term issues.

But the national governments in question are themselves elected. The clout (To an extend...) they have over the EU parliament is fundamentally supported by them being held accountable by their populace at home, via the national elections. They're still democratically legitimised, they're still held accountable by elections. Just, well, different ones.

This does mean that the EU legislative organisation needs to be worked upon. It does not, however, mean that the EU isn't democratic, seeing as all its institutions are still based on democratic legitimation via national elections.

With the EU Commission, well, the relative lack of interest in EU elections, combined with the people on the party lists tending to be second rate because the important ones go for the national parliaments instead, does indeed mean that it has a fairly easy time with the European Parliament. It's just... Them having to deal with a relatively easy-going parliament doesn't randomly mean said parliament isn't elected, or doesn't have the right to question the commission (It absolutely does have it, and uses it). Nevermind that the Commission can only propose new legislation, it cannot make it law - that's the parliament's job, too.

One might wish for a less cooperative parliament. But it being comparatively cooperative doesn't randomly make it undemocratic.

[Genivaria]

It destroys The original countries culture and replaces it with trashculture

You must be of the left wing, if so as a Helmerist socialist why are you opposed to the EU?

What does the EU have to do with Socialism?

[Nazis in Space]

You must be of the left wing, if so as a Helmerist socialist why are you opposed to the EU?

What does the EU have to do with Socialism?

It maintains the largest free market in the world, encourages private investment and enforces privatisation of state monopolies (Telecommunications come to mind).

Fucking commies.

[Gravlen]

I quite like Gravlax...

[Of the Free Socialist Territories]

What does the EU have to do with Socialism?

It maintains the largest free market in the world, encourages private investment and enforces privatisation of state monopolies (Telecommunications come to mind).

Fucking commies.

Obviously.

[Grand Britannia]

Will the prize get taken away if Russia joins the EU?

[ArghNeedAName]

Such criticisms can often be badly worded, though Vaclav Klaus, the president of the Czech Republic often sums it up well. Essentially, the EU doesn't function as a parliamentary system - not even like the "Polder model". Elections to the European Parliament have no real clout. Did the 2009 parliamentary elections really make a difference to how the EU was governed? Will Barroso, Van Rompuy or Schulz have to work hard to do their job successfully because they fear the 2014 elections will cost them their jobs? Will people like us have any influence over who fends up in charge of the European institutions? No, the elections won't change much; I expect eurosceptic parties will make some gains but the majority of MEPs elected will largely support continuing the policies and keeping them in office.

Rather debatable. It's true that relatively few people care about the EU parliament elections, and it's likewise true that they tend to largely toe the line their national governments and the institutions they occupy (The councils) provide. This is a bad thing, I'm not arguing that - though I'd very much argue that this isn't so much because the parliament is dependent on these institutions, but rather because it is filled with idealists who wish to advance the EU at all costs, even if the short-term benefits risk being long-term issues.

But the national governments in question are themselves elected. The clout (To an extend...) they have over the EU parliament is fundamentally supported by them being held accountable by their populace at home, via the national elections. They're still democratically legitimised, they're still held accountable by elections. Just, well, different ones.

This does mean that the EU legislative organisation needs to be worked upon. It does not, however, mean that the EU isn't democratic, seeing as all its institutions are still based on democratic legitimation via national elections.

With the EU Commission, well, the relative lack of interest in EU elections, combined with the people on the party lists tending to be second rate because the important ones go for the national parliaments instead, does indeed mean that it has a fairly easy time with the European Parliament. It's just... Them having to deal with a relatively easy-going parliament doesn't randomly mean said parliament isn't elected, or doesn't have the right to question the commission (It absolutely does have it, and uses it). Nevermind that the Commission can only propose new legislation, it cannot make it law - that's the parliament's job, too.

One might wish for a less cooperative parliament. But it being comparatively cooperative doesn't randomly make it undemocratic.

A possible solution to the problem with the lack of influence of EU elections is to introduce a small elected chamber (say, 100 seats) which is elected with pan-European parties only, to compliment the existing Parliament which is elected with national parties. I'm against having an elected EU-president because of the "winner-takes-all" nature of the presidential systems.

[Rubiconic Crossings V2 rev 1f]

I quite like Gravlax...

oh mate...it's fucking scrummy yummy!

[Ethel mermania]

oh mate...it's fucking scrummy yummy!

Fwiw I prefer my salmon smoked not buried. But I have had it, its ok. When you start singing the praises of lutefisk, we will send the men in the white jackets for you.

[Genivaria]

Will the prize get taken away if Russia joins the EU?

It wouldn't be the EU anymore would it?
Unless EU then mean't Eurasian Union.....hmm that could work actually.
But it'll never happen as long as Putin is in power.

[Rubiconic Crossings V2 rev 1f]

oh mate...it's fucking scrummy yummy!

Fwiw I prefer my salmon smoked not buried. But I have had it, its ok. When you start singing the praises of lutefisk, we will send the men in the white jackets for you.

You only need to send the men in white coats if I get a total craving for Hákarl...yes it is Icelandic but hey...its still Scandinavian as far as I'm concerned...

[Grand Britannia]

Will the prize get taken away if Russia joins the EU?

It wouldn't be the EU anymore would it?
Unless EU then mean't Eurasian Union.....hmm that could work actually.
But it'll never happen as long as Putin is in power.

Well....