← Back to context

Comment by mikkupikku

10 hours ago

You describe the EU as an undemocratic institution that brings about unwanted laws by fatigue, I understand that perspective.

You also say that the collapse of the EU would be insanely sad. I also understand that perspective.

What I don't understand is how somebody could have both of these points of view at once, in the same comment no less.

first of all, not everything is good or bad. the EU does masses of good and is probably [read: definitely] the most mature and healthy legislative body governing >100m population ever to have existed

chat control has not passed, and undoubtedly will not pass in any deeply unpalatable state. this is the point of the unanimity requirement of the EU. most likely in the end we will get some kind of law giving additional search powers to police, perhaps allowing them to remotely "switch on" chat scanning for a suspect via specific court order, comparably to how they compromised on facial recognition

secondly, to agree with the sibling comment, I look at the results, not the process. the EU has incredible results by anyone's measure, and perhaps their processes need a tweak or two, but this "it must be ultra-democracy or I don't want it" attitude just feels overly simplistic, and likely driven by ideological commitments to other things the EU opposes

A lot of people think democracy is a bad thing - or that too much democracy is a bad thing.

A lot of people support what they want the EU to be rather than what it actually is. Applies in general - people can love their country without supporting its current government or constitution.