killer_clank
Member
This. Northern Ireland which has a need for that sort of thing has compulsory ID.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
European Parliament Elections 2014 |OT| The Undemocratic EU is Actually Elected
- Thread starter anonymous_abc
- Start date
- Status
This. Northern Ireland which has a need for that sort of thing has compulsory ID.
Ahah, no yeah. I know what the EU Parliament is.
What I meant is that I (we) don't know any idea carried on by parties and candidates, because Italian parties shifted all the attention to internal political skirmish giving zero fuck for actual EU stuff.
And this saddens me A LOT, because is a perfect mirror of what happens for every political campaign here: it's a long tiring and useless fight against main candidates, where actual ideas (either good or bad, that's not my point) basically cannot emerge, because no one gives a damn and just want to shit upon adversaries, in an approach that resemble more football supporting than proper political debating.
I know it happenes everywhere, but still, what has been happening in the last 4-5 years of Italian politics is a kind of alarming crescendo towards a complete political void.
EDIT: I've always wanted to open a thread about Italian politics, as I'm really curious of what other countries think of us and how do they perceive us.
But 1) I guess no one really cares about us, and 2) talking about politics is always a dirty and dangerous path, and I really don't aim to a permaban.
CyclopsRock
Member
My contest wasn't that it doesn't belong to the people - though of course, there's a lot more to democracy than elections, and whilst a government and legislature mandate may well derive from the people, that doesn't mean that this is where the power is - but that both national parliaments and the EU parliament are voted in by "the people", so one legislature trumping the other isn't really due to "the people" having power. "The people" have the power whichever parliament it's in, the only difference is that the more local a legislature is, the more likely the people there will have laws that they actually want. In this sense, I think it's pretty hard to argue that the European Parliament offers greater power to the people, and your example about the ECHR applying even in countries whose populations oppose it is a good example of this. I'm not sure "the people" having power means that the citizens of countries A, B and C should be telling the citizens of country D what to do.
ComputerMKII
Banned
Ahah, no yeah. I know what the EU Parliament is.
What I meant is that I (we) don't know any idea carried on by parties and candidates, because Italian parties shifted all the attention to internal political skirmish giving zero fuck for actual EU stuff.
And this saddens me A LOT, because is a perfect mirror of what happens for every political campaign here: it's a long tiring and useless fight against main candidates, where actual ideas (either good or bad, that's not my point) basically cannot emerge, because no one gives a damn and just want to shit upon adversaries, in an approach that resemble more football supporting than proper political debating.
I know it happenes everywhere, but still, what has been happening in the last 4-5 years of Italian politics is a kind of alarming crescendo towards a complete political void.
EDIT: I've always wanted to open a thread about Italian politics, as I'm really curious of what other countries think of us and how do they perceive us.
But 1) I guess no one really cares about us, and 2) talking about politics is always a dirty and dangerous path, and I really don't aim to a permaban.
If we didn't have a rotten political system which asks the opinion of millions of people who don't give a shit and who think 10 seconds -at most- about a decision which is both capital and without a perceivable consequence, we wouldn't be discussing this issue.
It's not as if the absence of political curiosity were the problem of democracy and we'd have to solve it. The real problem is democracy, because it doesn't take into account the reality of the human condition.
The reality of the human condition is that most people -soundly- don't give a single fuck and if they weren't told all day that it's important for them and if they weren't given power without responsibility, it wouldn't be a problem. It would even be great!
I get what you mean (even if I don't agree with it to a certain extent) (fake edit: I re-read your post and probably I don't really understand what you mean, in which case excuse me in advance
), but what is happening in Italy is basically the opposite of people not being curious or involved in politics.Actually, too many people are interested in politics right now, but what we lack is a proper political class able enough to channel this unrest into something positive, or at least useful. Instead we have politicians who just exploit this interest with easy catch phrases but without providing actual solutions.
And if a leader says "we're gonna cut political expenses in order to cut taxes", the "simple mind" gets amazed by this (and starts involving in politics like I've never seen before!), but it just doesn't have the tools to understand all the side effects that could occur (ie. more corruption or the sheer fact that political expenses simply aren't enough to cover a substantial tax cut).
I don't know if you get what I mean, and I really wouldn't want to be the guy who says that dumb people shouldn't vote, because more often than not it isn't the people's fault, but their leaders and their inability to lead.
The other side of being able to vote is being able to be elected, that means every one of us have the right to be the politicians holding the power. Yes I know it's not that simple as I work in politics and while the elected politicians are the visible side of politics a lot of work happens elsewhere by the secretaries, the lobbyists and individual informed citizens alike. If you don't want to be an elected official you can lobby for thing yourself, or work behind the scenes giving something to the politicians to work on. The thing is that the elected officials are just normal people like us, they depend on information produced by others to make decisions. And if the majority of people are silent then they get their information from those who aren't.
People have the power, but they they need to use that power. More apathy is not an answer to fix apathy.
But to answer your other point about telling people in other countries what to do:
I don't agree with you. Every international agreement, even bilateral ones have at least some aspect of one country telling another what to do. It's about setting common rules of conduct. You can't have a football game where the teams follow their own rules about offside, fouls and penalties.
The only time when citizens of one nation can't tell the others what to do in any way is when that nation is completely oppressed by the other. And that is not a situation I could agree on in any sense.
Exit polls are generally quite reliable. It is likely that a lower than expected voter turnout hurt PVV chances. I suspect they remain the party with the broadest support in the Netherlands generally, they just have an electorate that is very hard to actually convince to go to the polls.
Also, if people are unwilling to admit they voted for an extremist party in exit polls, why would they be willing to declare their intention to do so in pre-election polls? (I'm assuming you're basing your assumption that PVV figures are unreliable on pre-election polling showing them as the largest)
CyclopsRock
Member
That's because - with all due respect to you, as I don't know your exact role in politics - most people probably consider what they do for a living to be of far more use and value than what politicians do, and that extends to think tanks and all that malarky. You're right, there's a lot more to it than just the guys in the legislature, however.
I don't think that's a particularly good analogy, because a game of football where both sides have different rules literally can't work and is akin to anarchy - indeed, as an analogy it works far more for those questioning the validity of national legislatures than the European one, the obvious reason being that if the European Parliament disappeared overnight, we'd still have national legislatures which are entirely capable of deciding things like the human rights of their citizens that should be enshrined in law. In this case, the EU parliament is more like UEFA, with (in my country) the national legislature being like the FA. OK, so if we didn't have UEFA, international European matches might take a bit of arguing over before, but we manage to play games against the US and Canada and Australia and China and India still, despite them not having the same "rules" as us.
Anyway, I think that metaphor has been sufficiently tortured now!
You say "I don't agree", but you seem to go on to agree that what I'm saying is accurate, but that you believe international common rules are more important than the interests of the citizens in any one specific country to have laws that they support. Well, that's fine, but it's not really giving "the people" power, is it? You're correct that all international agreements involve some degree of compromise between nations but a) this is generally seen as a bad thing and to be avoided where possible (ie everyone getting their way should be the goal, even if it's often not achievable) and b) is usually as part of a negotiation, not simply by virtue of a majority vote. I think that's a pretty important distinction, because if, say, Mexico are asked by the US to give their law enforcement agencies access to certain registers as part of a trade deal, Mexico is a) free to decline and b) free to counter-offer with something else in return if they want. With the EU, the "walk away" card only exists in the form of a country entirely leaving the EU, which is a little bit of a blunt tool, especially when there's actually no relation between (for example) the free movement of people and specific elements of the ECHR - yet they're interwined as a all-or-nothing bundle.
As such, I find it hard to defend any instance of a country having rules thrust upon it that its citizens nor its government actually support, and I certainly wouldn't agree that this gives those citizens more power.
Effectively they are not.
anonymous_abc
Member
So what happened in the Netherlands then? Did their results get 'leaked'?
Well, not really. 664,316 votes were reported by website Geenstijl, however, that is something like 5.5% of the electorate in this case, and thus is unlikely to be fully representative. However, their results do agree with exit polling that it was the staunchly pro-EU social liberal D66 that came out ahead, followed closely by the Christian Democrats (despite a significant decline in support), and that the deeply anti-EU PVV was the biggest loser of these elections, and certainly performed far worse than pre-election polling suggested, which probably means voter turnout was very low.
anonymous_abc
Member
swordfishtrombones
Member
Also worth noting that the six "big" parties were all in the 10-15% range of votes. Combined with the low number of seats available this will make it unlikely that the final results will be dramatically different.
Results by Geenstijl
I work as a secretary in administration of a political party. I don't write policy papers or lobby actively within the party but rather organize campaigns, events and general functions in my area. One part of this job is helping people to navigate through the system and get their ideas heard and I think my generally positive view of politics stems from that part of my experience - I've seen people who want to take action take it and eventually change policies.
I also deal with elected officials almost daily and I somewhat know that what their job is is largely information management. The flood of data and ideas in the political sphere is overwhelming to any individual, that's why people tend to steer towards getting information from fewer sources they tend to trust, leaving a lot outside. This is where my negative views of politics stem from, I've seen frustrated people who had campaigned for a good cause for years without any success just because they were in the wrong place. In today's world it's easy to get lost in the background noise.
Yeah, I was going for the global playing field analogy. But I'll let it slip now.
You're right in a way. International policies take a bit of power away from the majority and those in power in the individual countries but they also give it to the minority. In case of ECHR the individual citizens' rights are more important than will of the majority. And yes I think it's a good thing, as it protects the minority.
You are not only a citizen of your country, but also a citizen of the European Union. And that's what giving power to the people means to me - power as a citizen of European Union, more power of the people as a whole over individual governments.
the reason WHY they are on top seems way more troubling to me.
But that's probably our own fault for not educating our citizens properly.
Why people still believe in "easy solutions" and "protest voting" is beyond me.
EDIT: I've always wanted to open a thread about Italian politics, as I'm really curious of what other countries think of us and how do they perceive us.
But 1) I guess no one really cares about us, and 2) talking about politics is always a dirty and dangerous path, and I really don't aim to a permaban.
I wonder why people still support convicted criminals like Berlusconi and his party of thugs. Also read something about over 500 trials on Italian politicians involving corruption and abuse of power a few days ago - most, if not all of them right wingers.
We traditionally need a strong leader that tell us what to do.
The more he fits our prior ideas, the better. We just don't care about the future (as in long term plans): if I'm unemployed, I need someone who says immigrants steal our jobs; if I'm poor, I need someone who says politicians steal our money.
The more he's convincing, the better. The louder, the better.
To the point that we're totally fine to ignore the leader's flaws.
Berlusconi, being a self made super rich man, appeals entrepreneurs.
Grillo is a more complicated matter, as he shouts basically whatever to appeal everyone, from rants against immigration, to rants against politicians, to chemtrails, to underskin microchips; in a single speech he says that technological innovation will reduce employment, and 2 minutes later he says that 3D printers that freely create goods for everybody are the future.
Renzi, and basically the entire left wing, I don't even know anymore, they're completely detached from their electors, and struggle to keep the old left wingers voters who would just vote for a left party no matter what.
So, in Italy, no one really cares about trials as long as convicted politicians keep shouting what they like.
And anyway, the recent arrests involved mostly right wingers, but also some left wingers (as it happened before, during "Mani Pulite", the huge investigation in the early 90s that brought down an entire political class, just to be replaced, a couple of years later, by... the same people as before
).I guess in some ways we're used to this, and all these shenanigans (basically, mafia involvement in politics) are so embedded in our politics that we just don't know how to react anymore, and we just let it flow over our heads to keep our sanity - or most likely, because we're too lazy to start a real full fledged revolution.
michaelius
Banned
That's great until you realise that some coutries have lot more Eurocitizens than other so if you are from small country your vote doesn't matter.
So you are in fact only changing what majority rules you.
That's why euroscepticism as in supporting parties that want Europe as federation of nations and not United States of Europe (or as we could cynically say Union of Socialistic European Republics) is in best interest of anyone who lives outside of France and Germany.
...eh?
So in what way does a vote of a single citizen matter more in a big than in a small country?
Quite to the contrary, you need far less people in a small country for one seat than in larger ones.
anonymous_abc
Member
There is one over here where the candidate got her eyes scrapped, look a bit psychedelic
peanutbutterlatte
Member
Waaaaay too many UKIP seats won near me for me to be comfortable.
CyclopsRock
Member
Well, we are talking in the context of one country having laws passed that apply to it that its citizens don't support. This is more likely to occur in smaller countries than larger ones, because larger countries have more MEPs available to oppose legislation.
Not that legislation is always, or even often, fought along national rather than political lines, but it's the former we were discussing here.
Also, I'd agree that its simply changing which majority is having the final say, and the larger the electorate, the more people you'll get having laws they don't like. It seems to me that a lot of people that support the EU Parliament's democratic legitimacy do so because they prefer the legislation that comes out of it to that of their national parliament, as opposed to because it's actually a better place to legislate or because it has a more legitimate mandate.
Yes.. but also remember that UK council elections are not proportional, whereas EU elections are. I expect UKIP to do much better there. Unfortunately.
It's a bit bizarre voting in Oxford, because our battleground is completely different from the country-wide one. Our city council is majority labour with a bunch of lib dems, and the next party after that? Greens. The next 'party' after that? Independent.
Conservative and UKIP *were* nowhere, and I'd be surprised if that changes.
http://www.spiegel.de/international...ause-its-disintegration-a-971283.html#ref=rss
An interesting essay from a former German president.
Joining the EU was a huge mistake.
An interesting essay from a former German president.
More politicians talking about the future "two speed Europe" where there will be a Core of strong economies and a periphery of states left out of major decision making.
Joining the EU was a huge mistake.
WolfForager
Member
Just voted in Ireland, 100% Pro-EU. Fine Gael everywhere.
SecretMoblin
Member
wow at those F! numbers
entirely possible that they could overtake SD
entirely possible that they could overtake SD
I like this a lot, although I'm not sure what I'll vote for atm. I'm leaning towards the Greens, and Fi is still weighing their options but will probably join the left wing. That wouldn't be a problem for me in the national elections later this year, but they seem to be somewhat anti-EU which I'm definitely not.Poll published today! Go F!!
Decisions, decisions.
Forsete
Gold Member
Excellent!
FI is clearly this elections new media darling (almost no critical articles or questions).
Former darlings, Junilistan and Piratpartiet. And as always, Miljöpartiet (2). So nothing new under the sun.
Voted for miljöpartiet today, was thinking of voting for PP again but it seems like they won't make it this time and the thought of moderaterna ending up third made me go with my homeboy peter eriksson.Poll published today! Go F!!
Apparently Slovakia had 13% turnout down from 19%. How is this even a thing.
https://twitter.com/electionista/status/470467700205297664
https://twitter.com/electionista/status/470467700205297664
Poll published today! Go F!!
Which block does F! belong to anyway?
That's something that annoys me to no end, you have to dig to get to know which block the parties are going to join and what their (the blocks) political agenda is.
Then you have the joy of kind of liking one of the blocks, but not really being fond of the local party. Plus that it's half impossible to find political agendas for individual candidates, and you have to contact their administrator with vauge questions in order to gain some sort of feel for what they are about.
Why can't the social democrats be clearly pro nuclear power and net rights, why?
/swedrant
Not all candidates on the list have existing records of voting unfortunately.
But yes, that has been a help.
DarkCronos
Member
I really don't think this is the case anymore. In fact you can say this about the left wing leaders before Renzi (think about the colossal failure of Bersani campaign for political elections in 2012... he and the entire party were completely detached from reality)
Renzi is very different beast. He won primary elections by a landslide. He is supported both by entrepreneurs and by young people. He is popular. He has a big presence on Social media. Sure, there are some left wingers who don't like him (basically the left wing of the left wing, like my father, LOL) but they are in the minority inside the party. And in the general population he is even stronger, because he also appeals to both ex-right wing voters and to all those former left wing voters who have stopped to vote in the last few elections
Eh, I actually believe this discussion to be heavily biased by our own (as in: left wing people talking about this) "context". Like, I never voted PD but always what was "leftier", like SEL, or Civati for PD secretary, and if my Facebook feed represented Italy, we'd be living in some kind of communist empire.
also because my brain filters out M5S posts as LOLCATS or other memes
What I mean is that, while I'm aware that Renzi's powerful behavior appeals lots of left people, lots of others are shifting to M5S because they just can't stand anymore things like the alliance with right wing or whatever.
All in all, my problem is that M5S is such a wild card that I cannot understand Italian politics anymore (and it seems I'm in good company, seeing how polls failed to catch the M5S success in last year elections).
cebri.one
Member
Not voting, after thinking about it i just realized is no making any difference. ¿Rememeber when France and other countries voted agains the European Constitution? Well, 4 years later they approved the same thing (Treaty of Lisbon) without the consent of the population. Don't worry, if they don't like the results of this elections they will find a way to do things however they want.
- Status