Selling? They handed their souls and asses for free.
Even worse, Europe is paying for the priviledge
"Europe is selling its soul" would imply that we are getting something in exchange for our soul, which is... debatable at best.
Truth is... we (well, the politicians we voted for) are just generally spineless and much more eager to play against one another that to team up against a common enemy.
(well, the politicians we voted for)
Don't forget the politician we didn't vote for though: Ursula von der Leyen. Her selection process was undemocratic as hell and she's one of the main people responsible for the so-called deal we got.
Her selection process was undemocratic as hell
Can you explain more/point me somewhere where I can read more about this?
Here. Basically before the 2014 election, a new process of a "lead candidate" proposed by the European parliament was introduced to make the appointment of the president of the commission a bit more democratic. That worked in 2014 and for the 2019 election, the parliament once again selected a lead candidate. However this time, the commission just decided to ignore it and instead chose Von der Leyen.
in short contries vote for representatives (smaller countries have less, bigger more) and representatives then can vote who will be a EU commision president (as far as i understand).
I belive Kurzgesagt has a great video about EU diplomatic system if you want to know more.
Von der Leyen isn't the problem here. Also, implying that she may be apponted undemocratically because we didn't elect her directly is naive at best and outright dishonest at worst... if you go by that rule you'll find loads of "undemocratic" positions (including, eg. for Italy, the head of state, the prime minister and all other ministers, the heads of the two branches of the parliament, etc..)
Anyway, the problem is that EU countries keep trying to one-up each other: it's divide et impera, but, since we are already divided, foreign powers can leisurely skip to the "impera" part (TBH Putin has been quite effective on the "divide" part too).
Also, implying that she may be apponted undemocratically because we didn’t elect her directly is naive at best and outright dishonest at worst
I never said that. No, it's because we had a democratic process set up for the previous election, which the commission chose to ignore this time. See also my other comment. It's not just me saying this either, much of the parliament was furious at the way she was chosen.
That makes even less sense.
The parliament had a chance to say if they approved of von der Leyen or not and they said yes.
That gives von der Leyen much more democratic legitimacy than whoever the Spitzenkandidat of the biggest party happened to have (also... is picking the nominee of the biggest party, regardless of alliances, democratic?).
Everyone who remembers TTIP knows: It's not the first time that European leaders are attempting to use trade deals to forego the democratic process in their countries/the EU.
Its not an opinion, its a fact
The tariffs were most likely negotiated in backroom deals long before they were announced in January. There was nothing to do for von der Leyen but to pretend to negotiate.
This doesn't make it better but the problem is not von der Leyen's incompetence but the entirely intransparent political process with which we are governed.
I mean vdL's incompetence is definitely a problem. So is her corruption. It's fraying the unity of the EU.
Absolutely. But if she is just a mouthpiece then things don't change if she is replaced. Do we reliably know whose idea the tariffs are? Supposedly one of Trump's advisers believes in them. But can a single man change the economics of the entire world with nobody fighting back?
I'll be honest, I don't think the tariffs are such a big deal as it is made out to be. Trade and exports from the EU are generally up, the tarriff thing just shifted them out of the US. We're diversifying, that's actually good. VdL is a problem in that she is completely incompetent at her job, and it makes international diplomacy tricky.
When the EU went to negotiate with Trump on Ukraine, they didn't just send vdL, they sent Macron and Merz and a lot of other people, because someone actually needed to get the job done. The problem is that those people do not represent an economic superpower of an EU, they represent a collection of regional powers. We need to get to a point where we have an EU representation in such talks that can be trusted, we need a person of Macron's competence who has the whole of the EU behind him.
Not that I don't think Macron is a shitlib, but he's at least a competent one.
The EU broke the newly established convention that the people elect the president to make her president. It was a very explicit decision to have her as president. To top this off, she was in German headlines at the time for corruption at her defence ministry, which every other country must have known.
She must be very competent at something and people in power trust her deeply.
We need to get to a point where we have an EU representation in such talks that can be trusted
Von der Leyen shows that we need much more if the EU should work as promised.
edit:
Problem solved
Trump claims EU leaders call him ‘president of Europe’ - Euractiv
I think a big problem that the EU has is that it's still working as an international treaty rather than an elected representative body. As in, you don't elect people in the EU legislature, you elect people who elect people who elect people in there.
The problem is that each layer leaves an increasing proportion of people behind, and makes it more likely that the outcome does not align with what people want, and in a spectacular fashion. Like US presidential elections on steroids. Then, people don't feel represented, or feel better represented by the people they actually elect, and euroscepticism grows.
BTW, no, I'd guess most people didn't know about her corruption until after she got into office. Domestic corruption scandals rarely get EU-wide attention. She also got into a corruption scandal since with Pfizer, so I guess her antics didn't stop.
I feel that a lot of bigger member states use the EU and NATO as a dumping ground for well connected but domestically unpalatable politicians. Like Mark Rutte became NATO chief right after falling out of favor in Dutch national politics.
and makes it more likely that the outcome does not align with what people want
That's not a mistake. Together with EU law having precedence over national law, that's the lever to control Europe.
dumping ground
It looks like that but
domestically unpalatable politicians. Like Mark Rutte became NATO chief
going against the population is the qualification needed for the job.
BTW, no, I’d guess most people didn’t know about her corruption until after she got into office.
People didn't elect her but national governments. It's impossible that they didn't know. I would assume that they even knew details that weren't published.
She also got into a corruption scandal since with Pfizer
That's the small part. The big part is that she was allowed to delete the messages.
News and information from Europe 🇪🇺
(Current banner: La Mancha, Spain. Feel free to post submissions for banner images.)
(This list may get expanded as necessary.)
Unless they're the only sources, please also avoid The Sun, Daily Mail, any "thinktank" type organization, and non-Lemmy social media. Don't link to Twitter directly, instead use xcancel.com. For Reddit, use old:reddit:com
(Lists may get expanded as necessary.)
We will use some leeway to decide whether to remove a comment.
If need be, there are also bans: 3 days for lighter offenses, 7 or 14 days for bigger offenses, and permanent bans for people who don't show any willingness to participate productively. If we think the ban reason is obvious, we may not specifically write to you.
If you want to protest a removal or ban, feel free to write privately to the primary mod account @EuroMod@feddit.org