The EU needs to Change. Urgently. (ft. VOLT Europa)
Вставка
- Опубліковано 13 кві 2023
- The EU is FAR from perfect and this video we will look at the top 3 things that need to be changed. We are joined by Reinier van Lanschot, Co-President of Volt Europa, a Pan-European Political Party, where we discuss what will make Europe stronger, more democratic and more transparent.
🇪🇺 Volt EUROPA
www.volteuropa.org/
Thank you, Reinier Van Lanschot
Video Clarifications:
1) The EU Made Simple does NOT have any party affiliation - this video is simply an exchange of ideas.
2) 0:57 & 1:35: Cyprus should also not be depicted as being an island with two separate entities/countries. All of the island is the Republic of Cyprus, and an EU member state.
3) 0:57 & 1:35: Please take this map with the parties with a grain of salt, it is an older depiction and it is only there to make a point of national parties.
Support the Channel:
💁♂️ Patreon: / eumadesimple
☕ Buy me a Coffee: www.buymeacoffee.com/EUMadeSi...
Socials:
📷 UA-cam: / theeumadesimple
💬 Twitter: / eu_made_simple
📸 Instagram: / theeumadesimple
Resources:
Source 1: The Council, Voting System
www.consilium.europa.eu/en/co...
Source 2: Politico, EU Deal Hungary drops Veto
www.politico.eu/article/eu-de...
Source 3: Euractiv, EU Countries to Reject Spitzenkandidaten www.euractiv.com/section/elec...
Source 4: European Parliament, MEP begin Revising Rules on EU Elections www.europarl.europa.eu/news/e...
![ЛЕБЕДЕВ у ДУДЯ: муху не обманешь 😁 [Пародия]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/E74h5fvVrqs/mqdefault.jpg)
Do you agree with these reform ideas? Let us know in the comments. Also - Video corrections and clarifications can be found in the description.
No
Of course not. EUSS is a disaster for the people.
Yes absolutely! In my opinion a major point you didn't mention regarding the reform of the electoral system which the parliament proposed is that the 28 pan-european MEP would be candidates to the European commission. This means that the European people would de facto directly elect the president of the European commission. However, if I remember correctly the EU council has already opposed this proposition in december 2022, noting that there wasn't a majority of national governments supporting the reform.
Thank you for the very needed work you do, maybe you could make a video on how to pass such reforms. It seems to me that the European parliament doesn't have such power, meaning that these discussions should be brought to the national elections instead of the european ones.
Yes there has been push back on the reform. Lets see if anything develops this year. And that is a great video idea. It is on the list :) Thanks for your comment!
@@EUMadeSimple There must be a change towards majority voting system!
Most of my Hungarian acquaintances say that the Hungarian high-ranking officials are not only pro-Russians, but they are actually very nostalgic about the strict military dictatorship during Soviet times. Back then, there was no corruption (publicized) , because free speech was not allowed. The dictatorship could do anything: rape, kidnap, torture murder, steal, rob. It was also a "great time" for pedophiles, who signed up as (corrupt) informants. Nowadays, one cannot even embezzle a million without being it leaked to the public. Nasty people don't want to be scrutinized, they strive for sovereignty.
It's important for europe to strive for independence in high technology areas, especially considering that europe may not have achieved the same level of independence as china did in the 80's in areas such as military, space(their own international station), technology (internet), manufacturing, and economy. It would be great if europe can work towards reaching a level of competitiveness with both china and the usa in this domain.
i think separating the european internet from the american is a horrible idea, a collective internet gives reasons to learn english, and english is important as it allows for better connection across the countries
@@piebit101 i don't think th op intended a separate internet but rather a stonger share in the underlying techonlogy and infrastructure.
@@Qnexus7 that-s good then
Well too start we will need to see some degree on deregulation and incentives for smart types to remain in a fractured market and navigating through each nations regulations as a small company instead of just moving to the US. It's just easier to start up there for most.
What is the problem with our strong connection to America?
Of course the USA is not a perfect democracy, but when we separate, we will change nothing.
I think the work you do is so incredibly important, that's the kind of transparency, which creates empathy, we (as European) need and you help with that
thank you!
Fanastic video. One of your best in my opinion. I don't know how you manage to explain 3 issues in 5:25. I agree with all 3. Let's hope it changes in the near future, it would make Europe a lot stronger, more efficient, unified and more democratic.
Also, it's great that your doing interviews with influencial people, it really show how much EU made simple has grown.
Thanks Novvak. I am glad you liked it :)
As a romanian, it is really frustrating for a country to block Romania's accesion in Schengen for some interests. Hopefully this year my country will be able to join the area. Great video! Can't wait to see your videos on the Western Balkans' accesions!
The United States will always be a step ahead precisely for this reason
And Bulgaria the oldest country in Europe… 🥲 they’re too afraid of the beautiful women & wisdom from Romania where * *everything’s for “free” if you know what i mean…* * (It’s a joke) 🤣👁️🥷🫳 I Love Romania & Bulgaria. (All countries have their problems is not the country but for each individual).
I know Romania is fixing the issues with the bad gypsies (Actually they’re doing it better fixing than any other countries in Europe) *They’re VERY serious if someone tries to rob other people* Romania is being more safe than a few places in Spain… (True)
@@tyr404 Always.
You seem to be very pessimistic, in recent years the European Union has changed direction, since Trump, the Covid...
The new laws of the European Union talk about sovereignty, strategy, industry...
We will see if the European Union will move forward despite the recent American reactions.
@@antoinebaldur2941 That’s not pessimistic. That’s a fact. In the economy of the 21st century, EU is nowhere to be seen with the exception of the microchip industry in the Netherlands.
You see it at the Ukraine war as well, a clear division of the ex communist countries that are aware of Russia’s ambition, wanting to prevent it from expanding in fear of coming after themselves, and the Western EU nations that do not even consider their security but are in favour of economic deals.
Innovative global european companies cannot form as their market is restricted to the country they are formed, whereas the Americans and Chinese can get financed, supported and expand at a faster rate on a bigger united market
@@tyr404 I said that you are pessimistic because you said "always".
But the European Union is changing, like I said it is working to build an industrial politic.
The European Union is not in such a bad position.
In aviation, trains, machine tools, chemicals, armaments, space, civil and military electronics, agri-food, energy, telecommunications, infrastructure construction...
The European Union is one of the biggest players in the world, and even if it is in a bad position in some areas, this can change, look how strong China has become in a few years.
The only thing we have to do is to want it, which is easier said than done.
Voting for pan european parties is the way forward. Regional constituencies need to be a thing. North italy, central italy, southern italy, as a more representative model. Maybe with city state representation. Like paris representing itself, seperate from northern france. Yes, removing the veto and going for a qmv vote is better. Lets give transnational regions the abillity to cooperate as much as they'd like, more so than with other parts of their own country, if the people living there want to.
The veto can remain for limited cases, such as the entry of a new nation. There is the possibility that Cyprus can veto Turkey if the North Cypriot question is not resolved.
@@slavianalbanovich9025 republic of cyprus does not want the problem to be resolved.
Nope, the veto is vital, you get rid of it, half the EU countries will leave, see where that gets you.
@@MMerlyn91 Disagree, there'd have to be a majority of members in favor to change it anyway. But the most common criticism you hear about the EU, is that it's slower than it could be. As this is pretty much the only way to fix that, i think most will be in favor.
@@Hession0Drasha That's the "criticism" you "hear" from Western media, specifically from France or Germany or from people like you or this guy who owns the channel who are so detached from reality that you don't understand most of the people don't share your insane views. Your opinion on youtube and the likes you get means shit. Last time it was discussed abandoning the veto, all of Eastern Europe opposed that. Keep pushing your luck, you didn't learn your lesson from Brexit. If you want a repeat, you'll have it, keep asking for it.
It seems to me that Europe lost its vigor. One of the reasons is still a big economic disparity between Western and Eastern Europe. Other reasons are different national ambitions among the EU members. France, for example, still like the pretense of being a great power (even though it isn't) and sees the European frame as a staging area; Poland, on the other hand, not without the reasons, sees its relations in the security area with the US more important than adding to the vague French vision of "strategic autonomy". Ukraine is a good example of how European strategic policies are futile. France has had a perfect opportunity during this war to exercise its vision for "strategic autonomy", but its "diplomatic" approach toward Russia has only fed pure skepticism and futility. The next European elections will be interesting to watch. If the turnout is low, these reforms are the distant future for future generations.
Great video, would love to see more about Volt in the future. We desperately need new ideas in europe and new way of thinking.
Why would I have the right to vote for a party from another country? That doesn’t make any sense. I’m not even affected by them, and thus it’s not democratic. It’s like all the Turkish people in Germany who vote for Erdogan… Forget this idea, it doesn’t make sense.
you are correct. You just misinterpreted the video. It isn't about voting for another country's party, it's about voting for a European party. Basically, it's a "fuck petty nationalism, let's try to better all of Europe." The proposed voting system only makes sense if you view yourself as European citizen. According to the video, it's more important to fight for everyone in Europe, then just for the people in, say, Poland, and that everyone would be better off if we fought for everyone and not only for ourselves.
its incredible that - especially in these areas, that are arguably the most important - a single member can say "mmmh no, I don't like it" and making it impossible to move forward for everyone else, even if all other 99% want to proceed
It was funny when it showed orbans guilty face
Both pro-EU and anti-EU people agree that it needs reforms like this. Just for different reasons.
Anti EU people want to be rid of it. The only hope is the replacement of the current elite with politicians with a fierce sense of national identity.
hell no
Yeah, we are all human! With the exclusion of Swiss, Norway and UK off course...
The eu needs to unite
In order to make the USSR ver.2 ?
Thanks. I Need more please . I need longer channels version from u. Please make The EU Made Complicated 20+minute 😂.
thank you so much for the donation. It helps us a lot. Haha I love the idea of such a channel :P. Longer videos will make a comeback one day :)
The 3 things European people need the most are
1. An immediate halt to all aspects of European federalism.
2. The discontinuation of the bloated and stagnant European Parliament
3. The urgent removal of all foreign and toxic NGOs
Europe needs to return to an economic, trading block that celebrates and strengthens the nation states and abandon the EUSSR project.
eussr is false since federalism does not work under communism
This channel poses as an educational channel, so this video must be criticized as educational content.
This video is biased while trying to pose as objective. Most other videos on this channel are purely informative, but this one treats decentralisation as a problem within EU, which can't objectively be treated as a problem, and definitely cannot be named as problems with democratisation.
Before any of this we need a constitution that clearly defines the limits of EU power. Lot's of time is now wasted on national issues on EU, for example micromanaging working times across EU states (just now trying to limit working time of Swedish firemen?!) and trying to legislate female quotas on company boards. These are clearly somethings states were able to handle in the past and are able to handle now. EU mingling on such matters just wastes their time from their own role.
A EU-constitution is too late. I'd doubt, that there would be any kind of EU-wide plebiscite, such a constitution would be drafted and put into power by bureaucrats and lobbyists: if so, there would be massive unrests both from the left and right.
@@Judah132 I agree. Changing the constitution is too difficult and too time consuming and all member states have to agree to it - and countries, for example France will never give up its stupid and wasteful Strasbourg parliament even if there exist no good argument for keeping it. Its not good for the EU and it is not good for 26 of the member countries and it is not good for the people in Europe. It is only good for France that can act like a parasite on tax payers from other EU countries by keeping this stupid parliament alive.
And indeed, this is the EU in a nutshell.
Member countries seems to have only joined this club to have a vehicle to scam tax payers in other countries.
Of all the thousands of decisions that the EU has made during my life time, have nearly all of them led to a more negative than a positive outcome for me - the average person. Less freedom, less privacy, more taxes, more unemployment, lower standards of living, less well tasting food. Its almost like politicians only seek new ways to
make life miserable for people.
I can only think of 3 instances where the EU made things that I liked. Like giving 155mm ammunition to Ukraine.
Forcing stupid electricians in Sweden to use earthing electrodes - and thus saving 200 people per year from dying from dying from stupid and avoidable electricity accidents. And the time limit on working hours that LapinPete seems to hate. I can only say that the idiotic and cruel schedules used at hospitals are stressing out nurses and nurse assistants and destroy their health with stress, lack of sleep and deprives them of any possibility of having a social life. So it is good that this new rule force hospitals to hire more workers instead of forcing people to overwork and burning themselves out.
However none of those 3 decisions should have needed any EU to make. Sweden could have done those 3 on its own. And I believe that Sweden one day without the EUs help would have figured out that earthing electrodes is a good idea, even our country was stupid and waited 30 years after Denmark to make this common sense decision that saves human lives and does not cost any money.
And the stupid overly idealistic belief in diplomacy and trade to prevent all wars - the very idea that EU is based upon - has been proven wrong. Strong dependence on Russian gas, and strong economic ties with it did not prevent the war in Ukraine. And this idea that everything was fine because we traded and talked with Russia and that a new war therefore would be impossible made us neglect our own military.
To me this shows what a stupid and intellectually lazy foundation that the EU project rests upon. We need to rebuild our own military. And so should other countries in Europe as well. Had we still had a decent military, then there would never have been any ammunition shortage in Ukraine now. Indeed, Russia might never even dared to invade if Europe was armed to the teeth and not so overly relying on buying Russian gas.
And it seems like Germany and France have learned nothing. And do not want to learn either. They are already doing the same mistake with China as they did with Russia, by making themselves too dependent on a warmongering oppressive fascist regime.
It's really cool you got Reinier Van Lanschot to participate in this one! Pan-european parties are the only way forward, hopefully we can see more of them soon.
Yes it is one of my favourite videos :) I hope so too
More videos with Volt!!
Absolutely not.
Great video🙌🏼, 5:05 we would like videoes on all of them😉
1:30 I don’t agree with voting on other countries political parties, but maybe it should be a direct vote on the European Political Groups, when we got European parliamentary elections🇪🇺🗳️
Thanks Kim. The idea with the second vote is that people can vote on EU wide parties. These could potentially be new parties that form (like an EPP) that campaign on an EU level. I also agree that having Europeans vote on national parties from other countries presents all kinds of problems
@@EUMadeSimple I misunderstood your point then😉
I'm not sure the European Commission or the Commissioner being a directly elected post is a good idea. I can't imagine such an important post being open to figures like Orbán who will use populism to seize power over an entire continent.
More power to the parliament? Absolutely. But the Commission should be technocratic, in my opinion.
Tbh if the entire EU electes a populist then it s the people choice and it should be respected, even if it s bad. That s what democracy is about. How do you know that techocratic government doesn t turn into a oligarchy or dictatorship if they are not elected? Democracy has it s flaws.
Here we go. You can have democracy as long as you vote for who "we" want. We actually need 27 Orbans.
4:29
Just wanna ask about something that confuses me a little.
If QMV is used, wouldn’t that undermine the legitimacy of the EU? And the thing is, EU laws precedes local laws, meaning if QMV is used there are chances where very influential law(s) are enforced in countries which are strongly opposed to it. Wouldn’t that create instability in Europe and another pact is formed from within, which nobody wants?
(I’m just a random dude from Hong Kong, so I might not have enough knowledge about the EU. I apologise in advance if I said something stupid.)
Yes that is the argument against QMV. But look at it this way, the current system allows just 1 country (e.g. Malta) to block a law that all 26 other countries support. This means that a country of 500k people could block a law supported by the other 447 million people in the other 26 eu countries. Is that democratic? Also, the Veto is currently often used to get something from the EU, like i explained with Hungary in the video.
Great to have you watching from Hong Kong ❤️
Amazing video! What editing software do you use? Premiere Pro and After Effects?
And PowerPoint:)
Swiss example for European Union! Balance among Nations!👍🇨🇭🇪🇺
Council of EU should be directly elected for the 2nd vote or introduce 2 chambers for the Parliament.
Veto allowed only for new membership, QMV for the rest of the issues that needed veto.
EU needs a NATO style army and larger power to the justice system to punish corrupt politicians that misuse EU funds.
very well said
Seems like a plan worth the shot.
Would this NATO like army include non EU NATO countries. And will it project power and aggression into Africa to protect French neo colonialism. Will it engage in illegal wars in the Middle East. Or perhaps China, how about a China.
Removing the veto right would be a disaster for smaller countries. Eu could force things on them that could totally ruin them.
So.. but how we going to get ride of the veto ? How we going to achive the majority voting system?
I cant find any info about this topic, when and how. Thank you
Great video. This needs to be spread and shared everywhere.
Is it going to be easy to apply the GMV or is it going to be a long process before it can be used?
Very interesting video, as always. I really like this channel.
Happy you like the content :)
Well, it would mean to have a EU passport and a common election and authorities and have parties on European level.
And most importantly a common sharing of the debt. So Italian, Greek and Irish debt is now European debt. But that won't do.
UNPOPULAR OPINION: I think that at this stage the current voting system makes sense, in this way national parties are forced to ally themselves with their counterparts from other nations, and to find common ground during the votes, after all they do not want to antagonize each other the other parties in the group, and paradoxically this could also apply to the Eurosceptic parties.
If this system existed, who could prevent the birth of a Pan-Slavic party, for example, which protects only the Slavic nations? Or the party that protects only Germans or Italians in the European Parliament?
Of course, perhaps a Euro-party could be forced to collect signatures in all nations to participate, but this could be very expensive for the emerging political forces.
I too dream of the day when I will be able to vote for a Euro-party whose leader I follow for his ideas and not for his nationality, but I think that at this stage the current system has its reason.
A solution that I wouldn't mind is that of a bicameral system, in which, in addition to the current European Parliament, a senate is added in each European nation which has an equal number of senators, for example senators for Malta and 4 senators for Germany. In this way it would be possible to ensure that any party could be voted for in the lower house, while only national parties could be voted for in the senate. The bicameral system, for the uninitiated, works that every law must be approved by both chambers. Bicameralism could replace the veto.
I'm not european but i agree 100% with the idea of a european parliament and senate with no veto. Throw on top of that the removal of the European council and European commission and replacing them with government ministries selected by a european Prime minister, who is chosen by majority in the parliament, and add in preferential voting to political parties and you get... The exact same political system as Australia.
BASED
You had me on the first 2/3. I don’t agree adding a Senate, we have plenty of examples where senates don’t work at all.
Creation of Pan-Slavic party is almost impossible. Even close neighbors like PL snd CZ have different view on war in Ukraine.
Also both these countries trade mostly with Germany, not among other central European countries
@@thetrashmaster1352 Could we replace the "chosen by parliament" with chosen by election, or by senate? I don't think that system that mixes "lower chamber" of parliament and executive branch is good idea. It gives government too much power and reduces discussion as governmental majority rarely goes against even stupid proposals of their own parties even if on personal level PMs doesn't agree with that.I see this habit of "holding party line" as having detrimental effects on quality of the politics, at least in Czechia. And another thing I would alter in your proposal is veto, I think that senate should have veto power that then could be overrun only if 3/5th of PMs agrees on it. Again, this constant override of veto is something that is happening in Czechia and I see it as big problem as law, no matter how stupid, unwise or outright evil, could be forcible pushed as veto of senate can be overridden and so can be veto of president, so it only delays it for some time.
Great video as always! Could you make a video where you explain the political groups of EU? And the european parties within these groups and how it all works.
Yes. Closer to the elections we will create a short video on each party.
I disagree on the proposal to allow anyone in the EU to vote for any EU party. I feel like that makes no sense: a Spanish voter would never cast their ballot for the CDU, and no german would vote for the Partido Popular, even if they agree what they stand for. You just can’t expect a Greek to have any knowledgeable of Portuguese politics of a Finn of those of Romania. I think having local parties join a grouping in the EU parliament with parties they stand for from across the EU like the EPP, Renew or the Greens is effective enough. Couldn’t agree more on your point on the EU Council though! We need to make give power to the Parliament!
Thanks for the informative video! :)
My pleasure!
Wait, did you mean voting directly for the party like the EPP or voting for any party in the EU? Because the second one is frankly absolutely terrible, it would cause coalitionism in masse and people directing votes to parties more likely to get enough votes to get things done.
The major problem with most of these reforms is the topic of international law. The EU is still an international agreement, not having any true power to force sometihng on a country aside from the country needs themselves. Everyone can leave at any government. International law is incredibly frail and often requires agreement as there is no one truly on top of the electors. The Parlament mimics a real parlament, but you cannot truly enforce anything as it's not a real union like the USA for example with Federal government and Law above the state one.
So it would require an EU party with absolute majority and power ( >66% in total ) to start such idea, and likely a percentage of approval >90% to give actual powers to the EU to be able to then enforce back their legislation. Until then, at the end of the day, every law passed by the EU is based on a "do ut des" scenario in which the EU gives many advantages to those who belong to it, but requires them to met the standards defined by EU laws, but the EU cannot at all enforce anything as a state can just get up and leave if they don't like even one thing.
I think the veto should remain as not all Eu decisions are good for all counties
Although UA-cam recommended me this video I must say that these guys provided potential long term solutions to three major issues the European Union is currently facing. Excellent take.
Glad you liked it :)
"There cannot be a blocking minority of at least four member states". As a European with English as my main language I must say that this statement is not comprehensible. Please explain it. (does it perhaps mean that a blocking minority must consist of at least 4 member states?). Otherwise the video is excellent, thanks!
you are right. Bad english on my part :)
Just disband the entire criminal enterprise.
Dear author of "The EU made simple", thank you very much for this video very clear and simple that explain complex theme. As the Union of European Federalists, we would like to suggest a video about the three following themes (i) "The European Army: why it is impossible without a European Federation", (II) "The fiscal Union: the reform of EU Budget as the first step of a Federal EU", (III) "The proposal of Treaty reform by EU Parliament" (for this point when it will avaiable because it is in working phase)
they are great topics. thanks
Very interesting video, thank you.
I would really like to see QMV become to be the voting system. Unfortunately, there is the obstacle in the need to get unanimity vote on accepting the change. How can QMV pass through, when the countries which benefits from the unanimity system and use it as a leverage to get what they want, have to vote for it. I do not see it happening 😕. But maybe I am wrong. Thanks in advance to anyone who would be wiling to explain it to me.
The Austrian guy is not our PM... never seen this face, maybe you got the pic wrong
If they stop trying to police speech and the Internet, maybe I will feel better about the EU itself.
The European Union hates free speech.
This is amazing, as an EU loving brit, I love hearing more about the EU and its structure. Great channel, just subscribed.
Great to have you on board :) happy you like it
Saif Subedar as a Brit your welcome to move to EU any time you like.
@douglas todd Gosh, why are you bothered though?
Can you clarify if you have any political affiliations at a national or European level? I agree with the reforms proposed and appreciate your videos greatly, just was a bit strange how you kept using "we" to refer to your and Volt's policy desires.
No affiliation to any party. I should have made that clear and I will put it in the description. I probably should not have said "we".. what I meant was, that I also see the need for reform in these 3 areas.
@@EUMadeSimple thanks for the clarification. Cheers!
Sorry for the many comments i am writing on this video, but i got a question. Is it possible for Romania to join Schengen without Bulgaria, considering there is unanimity for RO? This has been speculated by romanians for a lot of time, but i think only you can give a proper answer here.
PS i still got a few questions about EU you haven't really mentioned in your videos, where should i ask them? Comment section, or some other social media? Thanks!
yes, in theory Romania can join without Bulgaria.
You can ask your questions in the comment section. And then I can reply or other people will :)
@@EUMadeSimple thank you so much!
Please do more in this :)
Giving the European Parliament the right of initiative seems like a good idea. The other two, not so much.
There is no ban on international political parties, they just are not very popular with the electorate. Allowing voters to vote for other member states' national parties is not an improvement. Either it doesn't "work" and people will still elect their own national parties, or does "work" and now the EP is dominated by a handful of parties from large member states who have rich donors for expensive EU wide campaigns. In fact, even within many member states there are regional parties who hold seats in the national parliament. This helps to prevent the formation of a two-party system where there is just a façade of representative democracy without actual representation of anyone except for party donors. I like my parliaments "fragmented" because coalitions make better decisions than any single party majority ever could.
Vetoes can be inconvenient, especially when it's not you vetoing. You call that "holding hostage" but this is just how politics work.
Great point
The problem with this is it’s a Federalist perspective. Among many EU nations there is no appetite to increase the power of the Parliament since it would undermine the Council of Ministers. Federalists wish to see the curbing of national interests but l do not think we are at a point where this is feasible. I agree there is scope to reform national vetos. The issue missing here is the inability to sanction or even expel nations which clearly breach democratic norms, like Hungary.
People often fail to realize the federal interests are national interests in many cases. A federation wants and needs all members of it to be prosperous, without that it is more of a hegemony. Joint projects should prioritize less developed parts of the federation, and this is what bothers many living in the more prosperous areas. I do not really see it as an issue.
The problem with Federalism is it ignores hundreds of years of history and identity. For example Italians may be very strongly in favour if the EU but they are first and foremost Italians, despite the Italian state being a fairly recent thing. Europe is not analogous to the US where a large federal state could be created on what was essentially a blank canvas. European federalism is the perspective of a very small, elite minority. It hardly exists on the ground. And it’s blindness to actuality means the transgressions of Orban and others are ignored since it does not fit their narrative of withering nationalism.
@@jontalbot1 Federalism does not have to ignore history, culture and identity. Cultures do not simply wither away when a federal state is created, neither do federalists simply disregard culture.
I am greatly in support of a federation, but I do not wish to see the culture of my country or of any other supressed. Cultures keep themselves alive when not supressed.
The USA has some sort of odd "unified" culture that everyone assimilates to, but differing regions still hold their own minority beliefs and partake in their own culture, culture actually never can be destroyed and "federalism" is not some sort of culture. Any specific region will differ from any other.
The failure that is the Russian Federation also hosts many many minority cultures that keep themselves alive even to the modern day, despite the Russian government's (and also Soviet) attempts to "russify" them.
As for the "elite minority", I do not see myself being a part of any elite minority, and I do not think my or my friends' belief in the need of a federation replaces our previous beliefs.
Last note, Orbán. I know quite a few people in support of federalism that are anything but blind to his dreams of a new empire. I think his nationalism will, as you said, wither and die over time, but his crimes, rallies and infinite vetoes should not be forgotten and should be acted upon.
@@elythas128 I doubt if one person in a hundred knows what federalism is. The vast majority of people are not politically engaged in the way you and l are. We cannot know for sure why nationalism has revived globally but the truth is it never goes away. I just think the EU should concentrate on practical, achievable matters.
@@jontalbot1 Good point, small steps first. The causes of new fanatic nationalism must be uprooted first.
2:20
This one I'm actually agreeing with you on.
Just allowing a body with a single representative pr nation to propose laws is problematic and fails to represent the proportionality of the member states.
Laws should be *proposed* by a proportional organ.
Great video. Please do make videos on reforms in other areas.
we will :)
As a Hungarian, I welcome these ideas, especially the cancellation of voting right. However, I can not see the opportunity to implement these because of the veto of Hungary and Poland. This is a vicious circle. I think, the only way to implement these reform, that the EU should be reestablished. EU 2.0. Who wants to join to this new EU, can, who does not - can follow its own very national interest.
I hoped that you guys would be an impartial channel reporting and informing about the EU.
This isn't an informative video, this is a political ad. You disappointed me.
as an american within less than an hour because of your guys channel I've learned a lot about how the EU works and so interesting but I know I'm scratching the surface.
The U.S. can admit new states without a unanimity requirement. I can see the benefit or practical necessity of a QMV+ for EU membership, and I can even see some requirement about not admitting break-away territories without the parent country's permission (looking at you, Spain), but unanimity is too much.
You are talking about a step towards federalization and I just don't think that is going to happen with Germany in impending decline, France desiring to dominate the block, and the Eastern nations in stark opposition to France's vision.
I am very happy to have followed this channel! Thank you for your interesting videos!
Thank you for watching :)
You must continue with your channel! We europeans are united in our destiny even if people wont admit it. I'm italian but im also european
You can't be both, choose one. They are mutually exclusive on a political level.
Good video, but how do you prevent a veto from a veto reform? The places most likely to veto don't want to lose that power.
Yes . Thats the problem . It will be difficult to do . It is an interesting problem that i have on the list for a future video :)
Greetings from Ireland, fortunately we still have a constitution and the veto is staying. Having been ruled by England for 800 years, we have absolutely no desire to be ruled by the Germans.
Problem is: how to change it?
Does that mean 4 countries voting against a policy is kind of the same as a veto?
videos on all of them would be awesome
The key reforms to make the EU work and survive are:
1. Introduce the BICAMERAL European Parliament.
There should be one chamber that looks exactly like today's EP, with MEPs and the number of MEPs depending on the population of the countries.
And the second chamber is the European Senate, where every country has the same number of senators. I think that the best number would be 2 or 3.
2. The President of the European Commission should be chosen with equal votes. Not the qualified majority-every country should have an equal vote, and the President of the EC should be chosen with a normal majority.
Because EC should protect the interests of every EU member, not just Germany, France, and big countries.
3. There should be no double majority voting in the Council of the European Union; there should be a normal majority, but of course the next step is through the democratic European Parliament, where the population criteria are included.
There is no objective reason why voting in the Council of the European Union has to be made with a double majority other than imposing a domination of the biggest members over the interests of the smaller ones...
Very cool
It would be nice if you did not confuse the European Council with the Council of the European Union. They are two different entities.
I feel like the 4 veto requirement will still allow blackmails. Like-minded PMs will just make veto agreements in their local coalitions (like the visegrad group or the frugal four). It is then likely to entice more cross country support between the big players (aka the most corrupt ones).
How is it a problem that you cannot vote on someone in another country? In Denmark voting system that's very normal and it's arguably one of the best functioning democracies in Europe. We have to be clever about keeping populism out of Europe. Limiting demagogues to their countries is one of the best ways to do this. Elections have to be more about ideas and less about people.
The problem with QVM is that you will produce a platform that leads to creation of blocks of nations that cooperate and vote together and this is a danger for Europe as there are blocks that tend to form naturally that alienate other nations and provide very powerful tools that form an opposition not to the other nations but to the EU itself and could lead to nationalistic forces manipulating the messaging and loss of confidences in the structure of the EU. You can also say that lack of progress due to veto power adds stress as well, which is a fair statement, however I tend to see more risk of instigating the right comapred to the left.
Loved the video!! :D
Great to hear Lucas. Hope you are well :)
great content!
I disagree with the transnational lists. The EU Parliament acts as the lower house of a bicameral legislature. It works like the US House of Representatives. Citizens in Florida & Texas vote for representatives from their own state. I think that is fine.
The EU must become an inter-parliamentary organisation, by abolishing the EU-Council and the EU-Commission and giving all legal and executive power to the EU-parliament.
Lol this will never happen. Dream on.
No VETO is the most important in the EU it protects smaller nations from the tandem of the biggest nations.
QMV sounds great, let's hope we'll get it.
Yes definitely explain the others too
The veto one needs to be implemented ASAP. The fact that one country can hold the eu at ransom to get something in return is unacceptable.
Without veto you can forget the rest of the european countrys joining like Norway and Iceland. The EU have little to non to offer us, and without a veto right, is asking us to join only to lose self governing and sovereignty. And lets be honest, the EU would trade out 10 countrys to get Norway
@@thor.halsli There will be no further EU expansion until veto is removed.
@@thor.halsli It could very much be lowered only to 80/85%, hell, even 90 or 95% majority. That way, minor countries can still very much veto stuff, but at least one to couple of other countries would also have to agree with them and protect their interests, but single state vetoes would be abolished.
Or are you truly claiming that if there is no possibility for a single country to block everything and basically holding the union at ransom, the rest of EU would really be able to come into unanimous agreement of stripping away sovereignty without any other member state disagreeing with them even if only for the fears of them being the next target or something?
@@Murdorch I am very much for cooperation between nations. And even if my contry is not a member(Norway), i do support the EU. Only together are we strong. But we have to remember that we are very diverse, many cultures, many religions and so on. What might seem dumb to 20 countrys might be a defining factor in a another's. And a veto power protects that. Sadly the veto has been misused for gains and glory by the few to furder an agenda or get special privileges so it has taken away it's meaning in my opinion.
@@Murdorch I'll give an hypothetical example for a need for veto power. Let's say Iceland joined. And for some reason the EU wants to restict fishing in some way. Without veto Iceland cant block that proposal, even though fishing is historically rooted in the people of Iceland and is very much dependent on fishing. Some countries who don't even have a coastline should not have a say in matter like this
But how can you get this ideas to be aproved by the people in power?
The QMV should be implemented only for legislative purposes and not for eg welcoming new member states
N°1 Reform : the Commission has to go. A pan-European government should be formed by and from the European Parliament.
N°2 Reform : the European budget has to be voted by the Parliament.
By the way I am not in favor of so-called EU progress when it consists in promoting immigration, abortion, transgenderism and radical feminism.
You may not like my stance on these values, but it is shared by lots of peopl, and pro-EU drones are more likely than not to consider normal to suppress dissenting opinions.
If it continues down this authoritarian path, it will loose whatever support it has in core countries and it will be over.
First urgent reform should be kicking out the incompetent EC
what a mess is getting more and more like united states of europe
please make more of these videas!!!
Volt 🇪🇺
0:51
Well, personally I'm against the idea of a *union* to begin with.
I'd like it to be a confederation.
2:03
That's a *good* thing.
They shouldn't make up a majority of the seats.
that's exactly what must be done asap, well said, cheers from Poland
Agree that Veto rights should end. But disagree with QMV. It's quite bad for countries with less people. It would mean unequal power between countries and would just push some EU regions in more Right-wing thinking because they would always feel left behind. And we all know from the history how it always ends...
The veto isnt going anywhere any time soon, it is a safe guard that it is exploitable, but necessary..... All we need to do is make it more difficult to be exploited for reasons outside the matter at hand. A union of 400 million people is not as tenable as it seems in the first place.
Cap the vote by a minimum population, say an area that represents five or ten million. Stop the german votes automatically being lumped together in one bloc. Let each region have its own voice and the smaller countries will only be drowned out, if they are in a clear minority. Much more fair and representative.
But shouldn’t a country that represents far more people have more power in a democratic Staren.
@@karlfranzemperorofmandefil5547 this is a union of equal members, this equality would go out of the door if we let those who had more people get them their way, every time and in every matter. Even the far less culturally diverse US has a senate that gives every state exactly two votes. I know it is the wet dream of the bigger states to be able to outvote everyone every time and get them their way but we are not a singular state and we will not be in the forseeable future. We are a confederation that got kinda closer than a typical confederation and that's it. The US example proves that even if we were and even if we become a federation in the future we need a mechanic counterbalancing the seer size inequality of the constituent states.
The EU needs a third chamber with 200 seats, where as soon as 0.5% of the votes agree on a person or a party they get a seat. And with ranked voting. It's the only way we will ensure our safety in the world and avoid a third world war in the long run.
If veto will be taken out some day via voting an influential coutry can eg incorporate a part of a weeker coutry into its teritory. Bad politicians happens frequently.
Great!
Sorry but EU is not a country and never will be. EU was created as economic union and it should stay that way. As a Slovak I don’t agree with uniting EU to one country or gave them any more power more than is constitutions of countries.
EU was not created as an economic union
I would like nothing more than the EU to become akin to the Roman Republic, but with chancellor to be its elected leader,
Yes it is undemocratic when they censore stuff they disagree with.
I agree with you
Political union to such degrees is long term impossible under a population with differing identities, like history has shown. Instead, I propose to unify the identities first, then do this.
End Council Veto, Parliment must elect from its members the Comission. Members states control membership and military, only.
And approve full LGBT rights at all EU states without selectivity.
The EU has too many "Presidents". Could reform the titles, like Premier of the Commission and Speaker of Parliament
The European Union has too much of everything. Too many politicians and hangers on hauling money out.
Majority voting is needed, badly.
Not at all, EU failed its mission and people are fed up with the corruption and the lack of national democracy.
💙
Educate yourselves and read Andrew Neils piece in the Daily Mail 30th July, entitled Why would we want to rejoin the EU when citizens in Americas poorest state earn more than the French