Unelected Jean-Claude Juncker nominated as next head of EU Commission

[GommeInc]

There's technically no difference here with how we do things. During the EU votes the European People's Party had a majority - Junker is affiliated and the best candidate for said party - ergo, he becomes EC President. In our general elections, the Conservatives had a majority - David Cameron was the leader of said party - he was made Prime Minister. We don't elect the Prime Minister, we never have. We can oppose them through public outcry but we have no power in the process. Other EU member state leaders backed Junker and therefore he was chosen by our quazi-elected leaders (Merkel for Germany, Hollande for France etc).The only problem here is that euro-scepticism rose sharply and Junker, arguably, was put in place to continue and further "ever closer union" when EU citizens arguably are against such a concept and therefore a candidate for the EPP should probably have been someone who could work on stabilising and reforms, rather than advancing it further.

[Chippiewill]

Jean-Claude Juncker 'will address UK concerns'

Jean-Claude Juncker has told David Cameron he is "fully committed to finding solutions for the political concerns of the UK", No 10 has said.

The PM called the European Commission president-designate and the pair discussed working together to "make the EU more competitive and more flexible".

"The PM welcomed Mr Juncker's commitment of finding a fair deal for Britain," the No 10 spokesman said.

It comes after Mr Cameron was defeated in an EU vote over the new president.

Mr Cameron tried to block Mr Juncker's appointment by forcing a vote on the selection of the former Luxembourg prime minister, who is seen as a backer of closer political union.

But EU states voted 26-2 to appoint him, in what Mr Cameron described as "a bad day for Europe".

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28081415

Maybe Dave's protest has had an impact after all

- - - Updated - - -

There's technically no difference here with how we do things. During the EU votes the European People's Party had a majority - Junker is affiliated and the best candidate for said party - ergo, he becomes EC President. In our general elections, the Conservatives had a majority - David Cameron was the leader of said party - he was made Prime Minister. We don't elect the Prime Minister, we never have. We can oppose them through public outcry but we have no power in the process. Other EU member state leaders backed Junker and therefore he was chosen by our quazi-elected leaders (Merkel for Germany, Hollande for France etc).The only problem here is that euro-scepticism rose sharply and Junker, arguably, was put in place to continue and further "ever closer union" when EU citizens arguably are against such a concept and therefore a candidate for the EPP should probably have been someone who could work on stabilising and reforms, rather than advancing it further.

I think Dan's argument is that we can't elect anyone because we're not a single people, whatever the **** that means.

[FlyingJesus]

We're not a single people because people across Europe don't share the same values as opposed to in England alone where every single one of us has the exact same mind

[Chippiewill]

I'm not sure if you're trolling or actually serious.

[Kardan]

Definitely trolling.

[GommeInc]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28081415

Maybe Dave's protest has had an impact after all

Seems better than nothing. In fact, Barroso (sp?) said the UK is a special case a few months ago. So there seems to be some acknowledgement that, as far as we go, we're miserable sods who see things differently - not that there's anything wrong with that

[Chippiewill]

Maybe he's hoping to cut us out like a cancerous tumour.

[-:Undertaker:-]

single people is so vague as to mean whatever the **** you want it to.

So to you, the world is comprised of one single monoculture that means we could effectively all live together under the same political and legal system? I go back to my example of a political union between say Britain and Oman, and could that work?

Are we not people any more

Europe isn't a people, it's of peoples.

And that's the key difference that makes all the difference.

It is, that's the point

Not like a normal government.

Are commissioners taken from the floor of the chamber? Can individual commissioners be removed? No.

No-one outside of Witney elected David Cameron as an MP, but that isn't grounds to claim that he's unelected. As for being overruled, welcome to democratic politics

It's not democratic politics when there doesn't exist a demos.

Both of those pages show that people wanted democracy and an end to a one-party system rather than being upset about what their passports say on them

No it didn't.

It was clear as the Soviet Union was falling that those people sought national independence (because they didn't feel part of the same demos, thus wouldn't want to be locked into a political union with Russia whereby Russia could simply outvote them all of the time) ...... and that is my point throughout this discussion, that you cannot simply throw different people together and expect them to view it as a democracy when they don't view one another as the same. Gorbachev actually made efforts to hold the Soviet Union together under a new democratic confederation in which each republic was 'equal' yet it failed and the USSR was dissolved.

In regards to Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia, both staggered onwards for a few years after the fall of communism in 1990 yet eventually split due to cultural, ethnic and historical differences. Democracy didn't work in those states (even under a federal system) as they lacked a demos.

One only has to look at the Kingdom of Belgium for a modern day, European and democratic example.

I think Dan's argument is that we can't elect anyone because we're not a single people, whatever the **** that means.

Because Europe isn't comprised of a single people.

You cannot have German, France and Greece hold an election anymore than you could say China, India and Russia.

Seems better than nothing. In fact, Barroso (sp?) said the UK is a special case a few months ago. So there seems to be some acknowledgement that, as far as we go, we're miserable sods who see things differently - not that there's anything wrong with that

Barroso is just playing the game, the same game that has been played since the project started. For decades, British Prime Ministers have gone on quests against growing EU federalism and every single time they've either been beaten or more than often gone along with it. They're just pleasing the increasingly restless great unwashed, after which they'll fob us off with a few meaningless 'reforms' and it'll be back to the usual shortly afterwards.

Exactly what happened with the Wilson referendum in the 1970s.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Ah found it, there's a reason this prophet is the man I admire most alongside Ron Paul.

On Democracy, Europe and the nation-state....

What happens then when majorities in the directly elected European Assembly take decisions, or approve policies, or vote budgets which are regarded by the British electorate or by the electorate of some of the mammoth constituencies as highly offensive and prejudicial to their interests? What do the European MPs say to their constituents? They say: “Don't blame me; I had no say, nor did I and my Labour (or Conservative) colleagues, have any say in the framing of these policies”. He will then either add: “Anyhow, I voted against”; or alternatively he will add: “And don't misunderstand if I voted for this along with my German, French, and Italian pals, because if I don't help roll their logs, I shall never get them to roll any of mine”. What these pseudo-MPs will not be able to say is what any MP in a democracy must be able to say, namely, either “I voted against this, and if the majority of my party are elected next time, we will put it right”, or alternatively, “I supported this because it is part of the policy and programme for which a majority in this constituency and in the country voted at the last election and which we shall be proud to defend at the next election”. Direct elections to the European Assembly, so far from introducing democracy and democratic control, will strengthen the arbitrary and bureaucratic nature of the Community by giving a fallacious garb of elective authority to the exercise of supranational powers by institutions and persons who are – in the literal, not the abusive, sense of the word – irresponsible.

Speech in Brighton (24 October 1977), from Enoch Powell on 1992 (Anaya, 1989), pp. 19-20.

[FlyingJesus]

Yet to explain what the difference is between people and peoples other than what I can only assume is the view that somehow all people in X country think exactly the same way and cannot possibly to see eye to eye with anyone from Y country