Who gets Britain’s European Parliament seats after Brexit? That’s the question MEPs have been debating in Strasbourg this month, with one group of parliamentarians arguing that some of the soon-to-be-vacant seats should go to “pan-EU” politicians elected by all European citizens via transnational lists. The idea has the backing of French President Emmanuel Macron, who sees it as a way to strengthen European democracy by forcing these so-called “pan-EU” MEPs to campaign for election on issues relevant to Europeans everywhere, rather than focusing on narrow national interests. When it came to a vote, however, a narrow majority of MEPs rejected the proposal.

But what are transnational lists? As things currently stand, each EU citizen votes for political representatives from his or her own country in European Parliament elections. So, for example, in Germany candidates are put forward by German parties such as the Christian Democrats, the Social Democrats, etc. However, the proposed “transnational list” would be the same in every European state. In other words, it would allow voters throughout Europe to vote directly for common candidates put forward by the different European parties. So, for example, a German citizen could just as well vote for an MEP from France, Poland or Italy.

Supporters of the idea argue that it would make the EU more democratic and, above all, more “European”. MEPs would not be beholden to one country’s national interest, but rather to all Europeans. Could this lead to genuinely pan-European parties and election campaigns? Critics of the idea think that’s wildly optimistic. They argue that transnational MEPs would be unaccountable to any single electorate, weakening democracy rather than strengthening it.

Would “pan-EU” politicians be good for European democracy? Would they be a step towards a truly European demos? Or would they create transnational politicians unaccountable to a real electorate? Let us know your thoughts and comments in the form below and we’ll take them to policymakers and experts for their reactions!

IMAGE CREDITS: CC / Flickr – European Parliament

75 comments Post a commentcomment

What do YOU think?

  1. João

    No, that would just totally annihilate any kind of territorial representability in favour of the bigger countries. I don’t understand this kind of proposals, no federation in the world has this. Like the budget hawkness, does the president of the USA exercise that much control in state’s finances?

    • Nacho

      They are going to obtain just the opposite result… Instead of a Federal and United Union, they will have a divided and segregated Europe… We don’t want to choose between being Europeans or, in my case, being Spanish… If they make me choose, I will have to make the choice… I want to be both, I’m European because I’m Spanish, not the opposite. There’s no a Paneuropean identity nor culture, so there’s no any logic to think about Paneuropean politicians.

    • George

      Failed, corrupt Mafia elites are afraid they won’t get voted by their own people…

  2. Micheál

    The EU has no demos. It’s a collections of 27 demos. Pan European politics would need for the needs and preferences of nations to be aligned. Fantasy

    • Michael

      What intractable regional differences impede Europeans from forming an electorate as cohesive as national electorates?

      I think the main obstacle is the lack of a common language, although as a translator perhaps I have a biased opinion. Otherwise, Europeans are no more disparate than the people in my building.

    • Micheál

      Germany would either have to give up a 9% export surplus, or give large outright monetary transfers, and allow large deficits, mustualise debt, in the peripheries for the eurozone to function successfully as single currency.

      Language is a big issue, but realpolitik is a much bigger obstacle

    • George

      One demos or 27 demos, its just a matter of how do you want to see it.

    • Micheál

      @George, I disagree. Europe is fundamentally 27 set of people, cooperating. In the US, people are American first, then Californians, New Yorkers etc. Europe people are their nationality first, and European a distant second, and around 20% with no affinity to the EU. If 1 in 20 people could name the umbrella group their party is under, that their MEP is under, that’s it.

  3. Michael

    Yes, and they should be independent elected representatives, not a reward for servile national politicians (Guindos, cough cough).

  4. Marko

    Its almost like EU wants to abolish sovereignty of it member states, step by step

    • Paschalis

      That has been the plan from the beginning

    • George

      It’s not at all that the voters will choose their representatives. I guess all the Eastern lesser civilizations are afraid that their own people would not vote their rulling mafia members.

    • Marko

      Assumption with generalization

  5. Jason

    No thanks. We already have the BoE/BoIS/Ecb and the Pope for that.

  6. Nacho

    Absolutely not… EU is digging its own crave trying to turn itself into a Federal Europe where we all are part of a supposedly unique identity and culture… Europeans don’t want that, British told you that with Brexit, Austrians, Frenchs, Germans, Polish and Humgarians told you that on their last elections and Finish and Italians will tell you that next month on their elections… European Project it’s going to die if you continue ignoring people’s voice, you can’t force this integration. We should bring back the essence of the original European Project, where European Countries can cooperate, keeping their sovereignty, to improve European Citizens wellfare and put aside this new European Federal Project which will cause the destruction of EU… I’m very proeuropean, but I can perfectly understand why these new political europhobe parties are growing in Europe: People don’t want to lose their sovereignty. French want to remain French, Polish want to remain Polish and I want to remain Spanish… I hate to say this, but if EU makes me choose between being Spanish and European, sorry, but I will be forced to make the choice… A Pan Europe doesn’t exist, if you want to create it, you will just obtain the opposite result…

  7. Ivan

    How can having your representatives living on the other side of Continental Europe be good for democracy ? Just another idiotic idea to try and claim a legitimacy the European parliament does not have.

    • George

      Let voters decide that.

    • Ivan

      @George I agree, ask everyone in all 27 Nations if they want to be in the pointless EU & subject to its unasked for European Parliament.

  8. Marian

    Sunt eficienti deajuns,nu.Realitatea si calitatile,nu corespund cu depasirea etapei sau penetrarea cauzei.

  9. Andrew

    Yes, a good idea, we could have like 10% of EU parliament reserved for pan-EU members, and maybe later that number could increase.
    However, a pan-EU party will still need candidates from every EU member in order to be attractive to each country’s people.

    • George

      You’d wish, heep of old ruble.

    • Tarquin Farquhar

      In the 2015 EU elections JCJ didn’t even bother to campaign in the UK – the UK being the 3rd biggest EU population and the 2nd biggest EU net contributor.

      This is a terrible and horrible indictment of the undemocratic and uncaring EU.

      Worst of all, the EU institutional footprint in the UK [the country with the ‘mother of all parliaments’] was minimal and thus the Brussels elite did not have a ‘feel’ for its UK demos in the geographically separate UK.

  10. Octavian

    Absolutely not. If the PanEU organisations wants to run for the Parliament they have the option to go with local lists with local candidates, as enyone else. Why positively discriminating them guaranteeing for them a percentage no matter what ? I bet it was their idea.

  11. Andreas

    Yes, a good idea, we could have like 10% of EU parliament reserved for pan-EU members, and maybe later that number could increase.
    However, a pan-EU party will still need candidates from every EU member in order to be attractive to each country’s people.

    • Tarquin Farquhar

      “…maybe later that number could increase.”

      NO maybes about it – the EU is a master of ‘foot-in-the-doorism’ when it can’t wholly get its way.

      Look at the ‘Eurozone project’ for example.
      Look at the ‘Shengen project’ for example.

      The EU is a master of ‘insidious control’!

  12. ironworker

    Who are these “Pan EU” MEP’s, what do they represent? I don’t know them, I don’t trust them, I don’t want them. Another lame attempt to bend the democratic rules and preserve the (EPP-and those behind EPP) financial and economic interests and hegemony.

  13. Paul X

    This is just yet another typically naive EU proposal, no doubt put forward by people who have spent their entire career in the Brussels bubble, and who do not have not a clue about what the average person on the street thinks about politics and the EU

    Quote….. “So, for example, a German citizen could just as well vote for an MEP from France, Poland or Italy”

    ….assuming there will be a German candidate as well, you really cannot have any grip on reality if you think that the German public will vote for someone from Poland or Italy over the candidate from their own country.

  14. Octavian Damian

    If the PanEU organisations wants to run for the Parliament they have the option to go with local lists with local candidates, no problem. Keep it simple and clean. If a transnational list is involved, we have no idea where are we ending with and who is hidden behind it.

  15. Jonas

    @Ironworker: You don’t know them because they do not exist yet. So no possibility to forge some trust.

    @Paul X: Obviously people like you wouldn’t vote for a MEP from another country. Fine. A new generation is coming, who thinks more about Europe and less about the benefits for their own countries. It’s ok if the majority of people nowadays would still vote for MEPs from their country. But it’s nice to have a least the opportunity to vote someone from another country who shares the own values and has the same goals. For me that would be e.g. someone who fights climate change, which is a problem that neigher stop at the border of your own nation nor at the European border. But it’s a lot more likely to have a major impact on European level than one member country alone could ever have.

    • Paul X

      The innocence of youth eh…I take it this “new generation” are mostly young, probably students and non taxpayers?

      One day this “new generation” will be older, wiser with jobs and family responsibilities… they will no longer have any interest in free movement throughout Europe (they would actually prefer borders to help stop terrorism) They will be more concerned with their own local area that their children are growing up in, safety on their roads with good street-lights and no pot-holes, with local policemen on the beat and local doctors…….you are entitled to your EUtopian dream but the reality is, the majority of people who pay taxes want them spent on things that are close to them and actually benefit them

    • Tarquin Farquhar

      New generation that has been and is being indoctrinated by:

      Pro-EU funded websites.
      Pro-EU funded University professors/teachers.
      Pro-EU funded University courses.
      Pro-EU funded thinktanks.
      Pro-EU funded media like EuroNews and the BBC.

      Please, please, please take the RED pill – before all is lost!

    • Karolina

      Just because people feel that way doesn’t mean that is the right approach. There was a time when people felt that Jews did not belong to this society and had to be killed. That doesn’t mean this is what should have happened. The EU is about getting rid of this tribal mentality and a repeat of WWII events.

    • Paul X

      I fail to see any parallel between people who believed in the extermination of Jews, and taxpayers believing their contributions should be spent to their benefit?…definitely off on a tangent there

      Anyway, taxation is raised by national governments, it is them who have the difficult task of justifying increases while convincing people to still vote for them. The EU gets it easy, it just demands money from member states without having to justify anything to the taxpayers

    • Karolina

      We have identified your failures before, Paul and your response to mine is just another one of them.

    • Paul X

      Karolina, Is it a failing to point out that comparing the concerns of law abiding taxpayers to Nazi’s is stupidity beyond belief?…..I can only assume you are blonde

    • Karolina

      People that voted the Nazis in also paid taxes, dearest Paul…

      I am doing my best to help, as you can see…

      Some people cannot be helped though…

  16. Anonymous

    Fun to see how Eastern corrupt failures are advocating against it :D, I guess they know there’s a risk that their rulling Mafia elites would not get voted by their own people.

    • Ivan

      Do you really think Greeks will be happy about being represented by German MEP’s ?

    • George

      Why do you think Germans?! And all the likes of you. Think of 25 other nationalities too.

  17. catherine benning

    Would “pan-EU” politicians be good for European democracy?

    This is another ruse in order to remove national and local identity and culture. It is a way to further remove the politician from direct responsibility to his voter. A way to remove any kind of accountability. And a way to dilute democracy.

    Globalism is Pan.

    • Karolina

      Unless my language is banned or my local customs I don;t see how my local identity will be removed. England has done that to Wales and Cornwall btw. People were actively prevented from speaking Welsh or Cornish. I take it you consider this a bad thing.

    • Paul X

      Welsh and Cornish languages were never banned, it was just those people who could not also speak English were not allowed into politics
      But anyway, if you claim something that happened in Britain over 500 years ago is a defense for what the EU is doing now, you seriously need to wake up and smell the coffee

    • Karolina

      The point is that it is not doing it and that it is ridiculous for the British to accuse others (with no evidence) of something that they themselves have done.

  18. Harry

    And what was wrong with the EEC, trade only, I won’t give up my Irish identity for no one. I want no part of a so called federal states of Europe. TIME FOR EIREXIT

  19. ironworker

    It doesn’t make any difference. I still don’t like it no matter what. Every MEP should have national legitimacy and be filtered by national elections.

  20. Brigitte

    Hello trolls, this subject seems to attract you! How‘s the weather in St Petersburg?

    • Nacho

      But why trolls?? Why don’t you admit that people have different opinions??? I’m proeuropean, but I’m also realistic and critical with some EU policies and intentions… Europhobe parties are growing in Europe, and they are voted by European Citizens, not by russian trolls, if you and some politicians want to act like if everybody loves EU and those who hate it comes from Russia, you will realize to late that you are wrong… Now we have time to debate and change things, improving the EU, but if you and some politicians continue denying the reality, the “bomb” (methaporically talking) will explode in front of your face… Maybe there are some russian trolls, but 90% of the comments come from people unhappy and critical with the EU…

    • Brigitte

      Debate, exactly. No problem with different opinions or with people who have a critical attitude. But there needs to be a point of view, reasoning, facts, arguments.

    • Nacho

      Well, this is Facebook, when you write more than three lines, people stop reading…and, honestly, your point of view and arguments were exactly as powerful and reasoned as those you criticize… Your only argument was “Russian trolls”…

    • Brigitte

      @Nacho True. I reacted to the posts before 😊

    • Tarquin Farquhar

      Please take the RED pill!

    • Karolina

      They are trolls because they use specific language and express specific views in specific ways. Key phrases are repeated constantly even when they don’t sound appropriate. It is more than obvious that their comments here are coordinated. The red pill that Tarquin mentions above also appears on Ivan Burrows’ FB profile. I don;t even know what it is and I don;t want to know. I have my own views and opinions. I don’t need to adopt someone else’s.

    • Tarquin Farquhar


      Re the ‘red pill’, please refer to the movie “The Matrix” for elucidation.

      FYI, yes the original motives for the EU were indeed virtuous BUT the EU morphed into an elite-centric, anti-democratic, hyper-corrupt behemoth – it needs to be re-created if not disbanded permanently!

    • Karolina

      You’re referring me to Holywood for the purposes of this debate?

      Thank you but I don’t watch Holywood and I don’t read tabloids. I only engage in intelligent debate.

    • Paul X

      “I only engage in intelligent debate”…Ha, I nearly fell off my chair at that one.

      Maybe you can show me just one post of yours that does anything other than insult people who dislike your beloved EU? …go on….just one

    • Karolina

      Those capable of an intelligent debate would be able to find those posts themselves…

  21. Federico Leva

    I can’t wait for pan-EU lists!

    The MEP I feel most represented by was elected in Germany, for a party which doesn’t even exist in Italy. Why should I be forced to vote someone who doesn’t represent me and just hope that the generosity of German voters will keep me represented in the European Parliament? Voters should be allowed to vote for what they care about and what they want from the European Parliament as a whole, even if their country’s politicians or voters have different opinions.

    Moreover, if the pan-EU lists were used for the entirety of European Parliament members, it would become possible to represent even smaller constituencies spread across the continent, which don’t currently have any chance to reach the percentages required for a seat in any small local electoral district.

    Finally, a pan-EU electoral district would create a natural incentive for the improvement of candidates and campaigns, because the number of seats obtained by the voters of each country would be proportional to the voter turnout in that country. (Note, the politicians of some country might get less seats, but it will only be their fault if they are unable to get votes from the citizens of their country.)

    Higher turnout also makes the European Parliament more legitimate, which in turn helps making EU more democratic: the EU Council is not democratic because it’s not elected and it’s not accountable to anyone.

  22. EU Reform- Proactive

    Are you kidding?

    Who is trying to fiddle the (treaty) books (again)? A valuable EU member left- that’s it! Swallow the bitter pill, cut back, reduce the EU budget, its bureaucracy, its harmonization, reflect and repent!

    Selling another (old) idea of a resurrected “Paneuropean Union”- of yesteryear?

    We just examined revolutionary Karl Marx anno 1850. There comes another so called “scientist” called Count Richard NicolausCoudenhove Kalergi with his 1925 “Practical Idealism”- sponsored by French Emmanuel Macron! A surprise?



    There exists a CoE. Not worth to consider?

    • catherine benning

      @ EU Reform- Proactive

      The link to Richard Coudenhove Kalergi Practical Idealism Vienna 1925 you have put up is blocked from scrutiny by Sky. Meaning it cannot be read. Whether it is simply me that is blocked or whether it is all who try I am not sure.

      However, who gave ‘Sky’ permission or direction to block this link from view? Who the hell is trying to make it impossible for the citizens of Europe to know what is going on in our name, via access to this information? And why would these people at ‘Sky’ be so afraid of us knowing the parameters of this truth? If it is a lie, all that has to be carried out is a rebuff and proof, as a retort on here, that this is not factual. When it is hidden from view this way it always turns out to be fact, because, truth has to be hidden from those it is affecting in order to deny them the right to put a stop to it. Which, by knowing of it, ends the game they are playing with our lives and stops them in their tracks.

      Why would ‘Sky’ have an interest in hiding any facts on the European project? As this corporation is owned by an Australian who has taken US citizenship and should have nothing whatsoever to do with Europe and its people. Let alone have the power to stop them from educating themselves as ‘Sky’ does not like it.

      How is ‘Sky’ able to censor any internet surfer from any site in the first place? And more, do so via this European forum? Surely that would be illegal. It is none of Sky’s business.

      Any views on this?

    • EU Reform- Proactive

      Hi Catherine,

      There are many search option around this subject- if being blocked!
      (I have no such problem) Please try under: “Practical Idealism”, balder org, his name (R-C-K), Father of the EU, European Integration etc…..

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paneuropean_Union (of course carefully kept at “arms length” from the EU)


      It appears “his” book is banned in Germany. Probably “too controversial” for some “sensitive readers” to remain calm, deal with controversies & form their own “healthy” opinion! Good luck!

    • catherine benning

      @ EU Reform- Proactive

      Thank you for the response and added links. You will see in the next thread I found another route. It was interesting to note you did not find difficulty?

      It is definitely blocked and is done so by Sky. They tell me so. It says Sky Broadband Shield. balder.org It was blocked because: and they give violence etc..as reasons for their concern! LOL

    • EU Reform- Proactive

      Catherine, did you know that…….
      COMCAST (US) is presently trying to buy UK’s “SKY (£22.1bn proposal- £12.50/share) which is 16% higher as what “FOX”’s offer is. The US wants to expand its services in Europe. The global “FOX-es” are prowling & growling!

      Who will be more generous with free speech?

  23. Alex

    No. Just no. Following Brexit, the British European parliament members should be removed, and the number of MPs reduced to the number without the British ones.
    The representation should remain in opposite proportion to population of each participating state.

  24. Carlos

    Mr Orban for Presidente of “EU” !! the junker dude is anti-european and anti-commun sence.

  25. AlOK

    Let’s not pretend this is about individual candidates – it’s about the parties they belong to. A Latvian voter is not going to research the history and character of an Irish candidate in detail, they are vote based on the policies of the candidate’s party.

    So the success or failure of transnational lists is who gets to form the lists. If it is a stitch up between the established EP parties, it will fail. If multi-national movements/new parties with a critical mass of support can just as easily get on the lists, then it becomes interesting and I would support it.

  26. John Costigane

    A pan European general election should be the first step. Thus a President duly elected could speak for the whole of Europe. This would be a transitional arrangement since his/her status would be comparable to the larger country leaders. Rather than being an appointee, as at present, this figure would act as a focus for Europe wide concerns, without the baggage of individual nation considerations.

  27. Ingemar Grahn

    The hole parlamentet should be Electrolux in a similar mattar as The Bund in Germans. And not like now.

    • Tarquin Farquhar

      @Ingemar Grahn
      You want the 2nd largest party in the EU to be AfD-like?

  28. Ingemar Grahn

    We should also have a direkt elected president in EU.

  29. Pali

    An image to mediate upon:
    Specialization of cells allowed for complex organisms to evolve. Like human body. With its thinking-capacity, will-power, high-culture in some cases. On the other hand, cell can survive only WITHIN THE BODY framework, thanks to the other highly-specialized cells. No cell or organ can live on its own. Brain will die without heart and that will die without stomach ..
    If some individual cells rebel, it is called cancer. Kills the whole body. Conservativism argument. :) On the other hand, little cellular experiments allow for adaptation and evolution – a key to survival. Basics of genetics, primary school. It is always weird/queer/misunderstood/outcast/rebellious talented individuals that drive progress! Not the “normal” “conservative” people who go to office, raise children and wave the flag with a flock. Liberalism argument :)
    I hope everyone sees that both arguments are valid – in balance with each other.

    I’m by nature opposed to extremism. I favor balance – between conservative thinking (preserving what’s working, safety) and liberal one (innovation, progress); market (incentive) and social (cohesion, solidarity) aspect of economy; technology (progress) and environment (conservation); needs of individuals (whom I love, how I live) and needs of the whole (safety, shared immunity).
    Good example of the extremes are on one side USA (on the individualist side, often on behalf of the solidarity, compassion) and on the other side China that believes “health” or “harmony” or “progress” of the whole society stands above individual rights (“Here and there you exterminate some rebelling cells.” )
    Both of these countries have explored going far to the extreme of its ideology … as much as coming more to the center. There, in THE CENTER, they thrived. Communist China allowing for some individual property and liberties stimulated its development. USA having stronger social feeling (often under Democrats) is always happier and saner place to live in and live with.
    As different as they are, still – just imagine, how USA could still exist, if Idaho fought with Ohio on some federal security topic? Or if one Chinese province vetoed another one’s stance on Chinese foreign policy?

    Face it, the world is shaped in blocks of more-or-less equal power (even if that power can be differentiated – money, military, technology, human numbers, natural resources).
    USA, Canada, Russia, China, India … the only equal and dignified partner to them I can imagine is EU as a whole. Ideally, as efficient (closely-knit) federation as the other ones.
    No nation in Europe is a colonial power owning half of the planet anymore. You think Trump will talk to … Belgium? Where is it? Or Putin will care about what Austria thinks? Why?
    Of course, the other large blocks would have stronger position, if they negotiated with individual & individualistic petty european “Nations”, weakened by their fights over brands and titles. EU is stronger and safer as a whole.

    A decade ago, before all the crisis erupted, I was writing concerned articles regarding how artifical no-taste euro-pudding pseudo-culture in toxic coctail with no-debate hurray-to-europe abandon-the-identity politics can cause a backlash. How individual, regional identity and culture should be preserved – in MEANINGFUL way – or it will all come back perversed. Today, unfortunately we already live it.
    As an example, ironically: Environmental motto “consume local products” (because you spend less energy and cause less pollution by transport; because you give jobs to your neighbors; because you preserve unique local varieties of plants) has turned into “eat Slovak potatoes”, because with local state symbol engraved by laser on its skin, wrapped in national tricolor package – “it tastes better, it is healthier and you get warm fuzzy feeling of being patriotic”…
    That’s the perversion I speak about. From meaningful regionalism to empty nationalism.

    Folklore, language, identity diversity is the great asset of Europe. On the other hand it is its worst pitfall too. The artificial nation states were coming to existence in 18th-19th century, patriotism (devoted faith in almost personified homeland) just replaced previous religious devotions of the same quality. All those (not only European) borders and Nations are quite recent inventions in history! That sort of “modern”, stupid, artificial, meaningless patriotism (tricolore? flag? coat of arms? local folk costumes? national dish? most beautiful girls in the world? most macho hockey players?) has caused both WW1, WW2 or even Yugoslav wars. We got already so far in understanding this and so we created EU (imperfect as it is) – now we voluntarily dissolve it?
    We need to re-imagine Europe as a body, its different regions (differently suitable for various economic specializations) as organs, that thrive closely working together. If I dream big, I see Europe as a federation – but not of nation states with odd shapes and sizes. Rather regions, ideally self-defined – freely, unthreatened. As a start – EU of Scotland, Burgundy, Euskada, Carpathian Basin, Sardegna – and whoever wants to call itself a “region”. Not a “diversity” of artificial great-monolithic-nation identities schizophrenically suppressing their own inner diversity. We can’t have mega-countries holding together by force and in the same time tiny principalities with sovereignty coming from who-knows-where. This relict of doublethink is somewhat absurd nowadays. Everyone has self-determination right (even the smallest) or no one (even the biggest).
    Think sane: country of size and economic power like Germany – being equal partner (in sense of sovereign nation) of … Estonia? Slovinia? Malta? it’s just artificial boasting boys playing on “states”. Territories marked by animal instincts. So that machos can fight over something. Painting their faces in national colors, waving flags and yelling at stadium. Humanity must one day eradicate this, or it won’t get far.
    I imagine also that small regions or countries or territories would not have these cocky dreams of living on their own. They will all need United Europe. Everyone will have similar negotiation power. At the end, one day, MAYBE, there won’t be any artificial need for nation states anymore. What will be left is just a practical decentralization, in most technical sense of the word.

    You just don’t imagine how sick and tired I am of local Eastern European political mafia using the EU as a cow for milking (money) and scapegoat for all the blame in the same time.
    How horrible is it to see them implement their “illiberal democracy” (Hungary), catholic-patriotic democracy (Poland, already close to fascism) or their own “national flavor of democracy” (anti-queer, anti-green, anti-feminist – like e.g. in all Eastern Europe).
    How disappointed I felt when they were knocking on EU’s door, though bitterly resisting every tiny bit of 21st century thinking, progressive laws that “bad meddling EU” wanted to impose on them, “directly from Bruxelles”.
    This is why I would definitely vote FOR PAN-EUROPEAN MP, not local (national, patriotic, flavored) idiots, who don’t see beyond their own nose. MPs that oversee the health and wealth of the Whole, not just regional greed and nationalist pride.

    Of course we need to delegate power, decentralize (it’s 21st century) but also we need to balance the individual with common. Each region should thrive and not be left out on perifery (that’s how I see the hidden needs and fears behind nationalism), but they all benefit from shared strength, security, cooperation as a big Ensemble. They can’t tear the Whole apart. Humanity is intelectualizing over the Empire/Province power-balances already for too long!

    These days, EU needs tweaking of course:
    -accountability, accesibility, approchability … self-promotion (not propaganda): To make “der volk” see that EU does not only “normalize shape of bananas” but actually influences every-day life, pushes national governements towards 21st century thinking. Be it gay-rights, employee-rights, customer-protection, environmental consciousness. You can’t imagine how big the gap is between West and East in this sense – still today – thanks to “national flavors”!!!
    -balance of humanity and self-preservation instinct: security vs. terror, borders vs. openness … this asks for cooperation again
    -balance between centralism and sovereignty: Yes, it does not make sense to decide in Bruxelles on what happens in remote Romanian village. Delegation of power. Regions, districts, municipalities, communes, families. Political basics known since times of ancient Persia. But this independence must be balanced by sanity – if the local petty kingdoms start tearing the whole federation apart – everyone will end up worse-off.
    -basic standards: Argentina or Taiwan feels more like European country today (in terms of human diginity standards, political culture, law), than Hungary or Poland! EU can do nothing, because unanimous vote is needed and two gone-rogue states abuse veto for each other? What sort of internal structure EU has?

required Your email will not be published

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Notify me of new comments. You can also subscribe without commenting.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

By continuing to use this website, you consent to the use of cookies on your device as described in our Privacy Policy unless you have disabled them. You can change your cookie settings at any time but parts of our site will not function correctly without them.