First, the EU parliament isn't a "fake" parliament. You just claimed this, without any reasoning, so I'm free to just claim the opposite. The members of this parliament are freely elected and they can decide out on their own whim, without consulting the executive. So really they are one of the 3 legs, the legislative.
However, the "EU is a fake democracy" is maybe correct.
The thing is that one should never confuse the EU with some sovereign country, like the Unites States of America. Or with a federal state like the Federal Republic of Germany. The origins of the EU aren't based in some idea of nationality. They are based in trade: how to make trade easier, how to create a common market. It's much more similar to the "Hanse" than than to a modern national state.
And as such, comparing the EU with a national state is futile.
It's actually astounding that this trade club got so many democratic institutions, like the EU parliament or the EU court of justice. A lot of other trade agreements only have fully undemocratic arbitration tribunals.
Also, "the EU cares about" is silly. The EU is a body of many members. The member states think not in unions (just think of "Visegrad members"). This list here isn't even complete:
- Council of the European Union headed by Antonia Costa
- EU Commission headed by Ursula von der Leyen
- EU Parliament headed by Roberta Metsola
- European Central Bank headed by Christine Lagarde
- European Court of Auditors headed by Tony Murphy
- Court of Justice headed by ... no idea
So one part can "care" about a thing, while another part does not. One must have lived under a rock to not know how e.g. the Commission often wanted some Orwell-1984 laws, again and again, and the EU parliament or the EU court of justice dismissed them. So no, the EU isn't a uniform body. And any claim in that direction is therefore inherently false.
Unlike nearly every other parliament the EU parliament cannot propose legislation. You may ignore it, but the reasoning for the claim was plainly stated.
>members of this parliament are freely elected and they can decide out on their own whim
MEPs are entitled to their opinions, it's just that they hardly matter. Everything voted on was already decided between the commission and lobbyists before behind closed doors.
>Also, "the EU cares about" is silly.
Many thousands of people are employed because of the EU parliament. It must exist for some reason or else it's just a colossal waste of money. Usually the point of citizens electing representatives that control their government is democracy. If instead those representatives have no power it is because the intent of the system is a potemkim village. An illusion of democracy, in short, a fake.
If anything the EU parliament is like the UK house of Lords except the British know the lords are pointless and continually try to abolish it.
> Everything voted on was already decided between the commission and lobbyists before behind closed doors.
Please stop spreading this nonsense. The Commission acts on directives from our elected national representatives. They get a broad or narrow agenda and work towards that.
Misleading misinformation. The EU laws come from direction set by the Council (elected representatives from the national parliaments). Then their chosen civil service (the Commission) formulate and propose those laws based on the direction set by the Council. Then the EU elected MPs vote on the laws.
That is not less democratic than how many countries operate.
Considering the kind of people that get voted into Parliament, I consider that a very good thing.
I only consider true democracies those countries where citizens can force new legislation by national referendum, bypassing parliament. There are very very few countries that allow it, and even fewer where the requirements are low enough to actually allow it to happen.
Anyway, back to the subject. If Stop Killing Games will ever be law, it will be in EU. We already have very nice things like GDPR, USB charging, and replaceable batteries (soon).
I think we know from using Athens of Ancient Greece as an example that true democracies of this kind are not a good idea at scale. Enough of the general public can be so easily swayed on a clearly catastrophic idea.
This is wrong. A "true democracy" is the system where you need to "sway" the most people on the catastrophic idea. The worst scenario is a totalitarian system where exactly one person can take the catastrophic decision on their own. Everything else is in-between.
It does NOT mean that democracies cannot go wrong. Just that a functioning democracy represents the majority of the people, and we don't have a single system that can steadily represent more people than a democracy (by definition).
It also does NOT mean that democracies are not frustrating: when you are in the minority, obviously it is frustrating. And of course you will be in the minority from time to time.
The replaceable batteries is only a mandate that it retain 80% capacity after n charge cycles, which phones already meet. Toothless and useless regulation, the EU strikes again.
All phones, really? Or just the one you care about? Even if it's all phones, it sets a bar, and it doesn't hurt.
> Toothless and useless regulation, the EU strikes again.
This is unfair. The EU brings many regulations. Ever heard of the Digital Markets Act? USB-C? EU does a lot for the ecology/climate (more than the individual countries, actually). There are many examples. Probably you don't like all of them, which may be frustrating. Doesn't mean the EU is completely useless.
I find that people love to hate the EU based on some regulations that they hate, and more often than not based on discussions about potential regulations that they would hate (like ChatControl). I hate ChatControl, but the truth is that it hasn't been accepted at this point.
If you consider the marketshare of phone brands in the EU, it's mostly apple, Samsung and a few large chinese brands. They already have batteries that meet the legal definition. Good regulation can have outsized positive effects but this just creates paperwork and changes nothing. But the idea of replaceable batteries made you feel better, right? The point of regulations and politics is to get positive headlines while changing as little as possible because change makes the lobbyists sad.
