Anti-islamic party wins European elections

[Jon Miller]

As far as I can tell, they have much to be critical of.

Supporting something where the general idea is good or OK, but where the implementation is terrible, is what gave us the Bush years.

Note that I don't like Republican general ideas so much, but the general ideas are reasonable/etc... small government/etc. The implementation was terrible, but plenty of people supported them because of the 'small government' idea.

JM

[a.kitman]

You've got to be kidding me. Have they got a party program besides filesharing?

no and thats the point. there strong showing in the polls also made some of the other partys top candidates change there position on fileshareing. well atleast made them change there wording, i think it was just bull**** tho.

[Kitschum]

You've got to be kidding me. Have they got a party program besides filesharing?

They have three main points and intentionally refuse to develop a complete program to not dilute the effort and to appeal as broadly as possible.

Copyright reform, patent reform, privacy / anti-surveillance

I'm not too happy about the election outcomes by the way. They're not as dramatically rightwing as our Belgian regional election results but still, that the eurocritics have gained on the whole is a worrying trend.

Many EU enthusiasts are too arrogant and need to take the criticisms more seriously. The EU needs to waste less, and to be more open, less dealing behind closed doors.

[Ben Kenobi]

I do feel that the Ben factor is a valid anti-immigration argument.

And I'm supposed to be the conservative here?

I think immigration is a good thing, but I don't like what the muslims are doing. I think if anyone wishes to immigrate, they have to adapt to their new country's way of life not the other way around.

[Krill]

Pirate party I'd vote for them if they were a party over here (they'd probably get enough MEPs if they were a party in all countries to make a substantial contribution to any small to middling size block).

[BeBMan]

They have three main points and intentionally refuse to develop a complete program to not dilute the effort and to appeal as broadly as possible.

Copyright reform, patent reform, privacy / anti-surveillance

I'm not really against those three pts (well, depending on how the reforms would look), but assuming they get some guys into the EP, what are they doing when they're confonted with other issues? If they don't have at least some basic info about their povs on other main issues, how will I know that they aren't standing for completely absurd positions there?

[Krill]

How's that different to the current political parties that lie through their teeth though?

[Traianvs]

They have three main points and intentionally refuse to develop a complete program to not dilute the effort and to appeal as broadly as possible.

Copyright reform, patent reform, privacy / anti-surveillance



Many EU enthusiasts are too arrogant and need to take the criticisms more seriously. The EU needs to waste less, and to be more open, less dealing behind closed doors.

See this is typical. The main problem is that these so called EU enthusiasts try to improve its working while the Eurosceptics don't. Eurocritics vote no to every treaty reform over the past years, not realizing their potentially beneficial effects on dismantling the democratic deficit as well as improving openness. The EU as it is now, needs institutional reform to be able to deal with 27 members. That means it needs to include less unanimity voting (or eliminating it altogether), more majority voting procedures, more power to the parliament and things like that. Eurocritics don't like it too much because individual member states will have less leverage. In my view they're clinging too much to the old-fashioned sense of sovereignty but hey, who am I eh...

By the way: one of the reasons parliament is fairly good at what it is doing is because of the many informal meetings between MEPs, commission members etc. Most proposals are dealt within a year, with a maximum of 1,5 years for some particularly nasty cases. If it were to become more open as you want it to be, then decision making will be more transparant on the one hand, but the bureaucratic process will take longer.

[Traianvs]

I'm not really against those three pts (well, depending on how the reforms would look), but assuming they get some guys into the EP, what are they doing when they're confonted with other issues? If they don't have at least some basic info about their povs on other main issues, how will I know that they aren't standing for completely absurd positions there?

What happens is the commission drafts a proposal first. It is then presented to parliament, which then organizes committees including members:

a) belonging to nearly every member state
b) belonging to nearly every party
c) who have known expertise in the matter

One of them is chosen as 'chairman' and tries to find out how different parties, countries etc view the matter, and subsequently attempts to amend the commission's proposal accordingly.

This committee represents the entire parliament so MEPs only have to deal with their own subject matter really.

So if those guys are elected to the EP, they will most likely be put in committees relevant to their cause.

They do have a problem though, because they won't be member of any faction, meaning they will never be appointed chairman for example, and that they can only ask questions instead of being given speechtime themselves. So they have less leverage to weigh heavily. But informally everything is possible of course

[C0ckney]

I'm not too happy about the election outcomes by the way. They're not as dramatically rightwing as our Belgian regional election results but still, that the eurocritics have gained on the whole is a worrying trend.

Pretty saddening days right now tbh

people in several countries have given a clear verdict on the direction the EU is heading (i.e. the no votes to the constitution/lisbon treaty), only to be told that their views do not matter and that they are having it anyway. therefore, it should not come as an enormous surprise that parties critical of the direction the EU is heading are doing well at expense of the parties who have shown their contempt for the democratic process by pressing ahead with the constitution/treaty.

[Kitschum]

I'm not really against those three pts (well, depending on how the reforms would look),

Yes, that would be my caveat too (especially about patents), but I still voted for them to stir the pot.

but assuming they get some guys into the EP, what are they doing when they're confonted with other issues? If they don't have at least some basic info about their povs on other main issues, how will I know that they aren't standing for completely absurd positions there?

A valid point, and from what I know they are welll aware of it. Ever since they started polling high there's been an internal discussion about how to vote on other issues in the Parliament. I don't know if it has been resolved yet, but in any case before the election their top name said that they would join whichever group that was closest to them on their core principles, and go along with them on all other issues. It was said then that they were first looking to the Liberals (ALDE) or the Greens. Another option is to just abstain whenever there's a vote on other issues.

Their number one, who is going to Brussels, was a Liberal (FP in Sweden) for twenty years. Their number two, who will likely be going if the Lisbon Treaty is passed, is a young female student apparently with some (non-partisan) leftist sympathies. Looking at their members, they really come from all over the place on the left-right scale, many of them are young (they received 20% of the vote in 18-30 year olds, making them the biggest party in that age group!), most are male, and precious few have experience from traditional party politics.

I think the biggest challenge facing the Pirate Party is not which EuroParl group to join, but how to consolidate their gains for next year's (Swedish) parliament elections. Many of their voters will be disloyal, cynical and distrustful of politics, but somehow the fire in the movement needs to be kept alive and voters converted (more) permanently from the other parties. There's a big risk they will lose around half or more of voters, who will go back to the party they usually vote for.

[Kitschum]

See this is typical. The main problem is that these so called EU enthusiasts try to improve its working while the Eurosceptics don't. Eurocritics vote no to every treaty reform over the past years, not realizing their potentially beneficial effects on dismantling the democratic deficit as well as improving openness.

Sure, I think that is basically true, but the question is whether the proposed reforms have been enough. And should we really take more powers from the national parliaments and give to the EU before we have solved pressing issues of transparency and waste? The Parliament still ambulates between Strasbourg and Brussels. CAP is still a hugely destructive welfare scheme.

By the way: one of the reasons parliament is fairly good at what it is doing is because of the many informal meetings between MEPs, commission members etc. Most proposals are dealt within a year, with a maximum of 1,5 years for some particularly nasty cases. If it were to become more open as you want it to be, then decision making will be more transparant on the one hand, but the bureaucratic process will take longer.

You can't be serious with this line of argument. So backroom deals are better because they are more "efficient"? That could be easily extrapolated as an argument for 'enlightened' despotism.

I think it is basically a clash of political cultures. Forgive my vicious generalization, but in northern/northwestern Europe we are more used to transparent and egalitarian politics, while the culture in central and southern Europe has always been more elitist and secretive (and corrupt).

[Kitschum]

Copenhagen has a bad crime reputation? I thought the Danish have absolutely no concept of crime?

BTW, on the subject of Copenhagen and crime, you really need to see these movies (trailer inside):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X6m9B-xk3sk

I'm not sure how the Danes feel about them, but they could be the best crime trilogy ever (yes, I know about the Godfather!).