Display:
'The parliament tends to poll highest of the EU institutions when people are asked about their confidence in the institutions.'

Maybe that's because the European Parliament is the only EU institution which, to most people, is readily understandable and recognizable. It appears to resemble the workings of a national parliament, which it does to a substantial degree. The members are known to the people of the country they represent, at least somewhat, speak their language, share aspects of their national identity, are directly chosen in elections. You need to follow a year-long course to understand how the rest of the EU works. Hardly anyone understands it, even reasonably informed people. Now there's a president coming of one commission or another. It's so difficult to  comprehend that the 'president' will be different from a national president. You have a parliament, you have a president. So what else does anyone need?

P.S. Obama is a national politician. I can't see him substantially diverging from the US nationalistic-imperialistic approach. Oh, the Elites. The term makes these people, whoever they are, seem like a choir of singing angels. Why don't we finally get down to Marxist earth and just call them the Ruling Class, which they are?

by Quentin on Mon Mar 3rd, 2008 at 06:07:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I  have a distinct hunch that the use of 'elites' to designate an amorphous bunch of wealthy, powerful people, who I would call the ruling class, originated or, at least, first gained common usage in the United Kingdom.
by Quentin on Mon Mar 3rd, 2008 at 06:11:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Occasional Series