The European Tribune is a forum for thoughtful dialogue of European and international issues. You are invited to post comments and your own articles.
Please REGISTER to post.
But I see the EU through the prism of what's going on on the Continent, and it's ugly. German-imposed austerity and wealth confiscation by capital has driven angry people to back xenopobic nationalist populists. The institutions of the EU (not counting the Council) are mostly well-meaning but, by design, incapable of making a difference, and largely captured by industry lobbyists (interesting that you see my views as enabling them, not sure where you got that from)
A movement to reform those institutions, to give them democratic legitimacy, tax-raising powers, the means of exercising the delegated sovereignty which is illegitimatele exercised by the Council, seems to me to be the only way forward. It's a long shot, but I don't see any other way to save the EU.
If you choose to conflate this with the Farages and Johnsons of this world, then (and I say this with a great deal of respect, Frank, yes, even with love) you can fuck off. It is rightly acknowledged that people of faith have no monopoly of virtue - Queen Elizabeth II
iirc, there was broad-but-shallow resistance to political group restructure when Macron raise the issue last year. Diversity is the key to economic and political evolution.
Actually if you do see the EU through the prism of Brexit, then much of what is alleged about the EU (yes, even the status quo) is false, and those criticisms which are true are often no more true of the EU than they are of the UK, except perhaps in the complexities of scale. So relatively speaking, I would see the EU as an advance on what I suspect the UK will become post Brexit. Even now, I find it difficult to take lectures on democratic accountability from a country with the only entirely unelected House of Parliament in the EU and a civil service famous for it's de facto but unaccountable power.
But of course as you say that is not the only prism through which the EU can be critiqued. One of the benefits of getting Brexit over and done with will be that we can then focus more on how the EU needs to be reformed. The UK as a member would have opposed many of the reforms I suspect you support, so removing the UK from the equation would be a net positive. I haven't got much involved with DiEM25 for reasons of time. A diary on their reform agenda for the EU and EZ would be good!
Criticisms of the design flaws in the ECB and Euro architecture have been reasonably well aired here, but your particular target seems to be the Council which is made up of elected heads of government of the member states. It is therefore the institution most concerned with protecting the national interests of the member states. Clearly if your objective is to develop the EU as a supra national entity, other institutions (particularly the parliament) need to be strengthened to counter balance its influence. But what are your particular criticisms of the Council apart from the lack of transparency in the decision making process also common in national cabinets? Index of Frank's Diaries
Hear, hear!
by gmoke - Nov 28
by gmoke - Nov 12 7 comments
by Oui - Nov 305 comments
by Oui - Nov 2837 comments
by Oui - Nov 278 comments
by Oui - Nov 2511 comments
by Oui - Nov 24
by Oui - Nov 221 comment
by Oui - Nov 22
by Oui - Nov 2119 comments
by Oui - Nov 1615 comments
by Oui - Nov 154 comments
by Oui - Nov 1319 comments
by Oui - Nov 1224 comments
by gmoke - Nov 127 comments
by Oui - Nov 1114 comments
by Oui - Nov 10
by Oui - Nov 928 comments
by Oui - Nov 8
by Oui - Nov 73 comments
by Oui - Nov 633 comments