Poland - Is the EU starting to crumble

[mickkotlarski]

7 minutes ago, Convert54 said:

IMO it is the partisan allegience to the concepts of right/left stances that are so enthusiastically promoted and accepted by  what should be educated populations capable of distinguishing reality. Instead there is this bombardment of propagandist distraction designed to attract simplistic polarized appeal to the collective ignorance of social engineering undertaken by both sides. It is the turmoil of all that that involves and encompasses is the gemstone of "freedom of speech" which has become a distorted tool welcomed by the media due to the freedom that truth and lies are deemed acceptable as a factor of partisan attempts to induct. In my analysis of the methodology is the simplistic appeal to the base selfishness of  "what's in it  for me?" rather than consideration of "what's in it for You that you need me subscribe? ".

A stressed population that spends more energy physically and mentally in the mundane task of survival in the various aspects of economic realities is very susceptible to a politically presented mirage of salvation or response of threat to the illusion that current life is harmonious with suppressed expectations is very readily persuaded to defend it even unto death! So much pride and honor in enlisting in an army to go and defend the moguls?

Where the EU has started to falter is in the disappointment of failing to provide for exactly the same selfish expectations of any prior or previous political/economic system and the witnessing of advantages to a core body regardless of dictate or popular appeal.

Humanity has proven it's  capacity  only in the development of technology with which mostly it harms itself. Other than that humanity has demonstrated no significant greater or different capacity than apes.

History repeats .

Yes. Unfortunately its the Whats in it for me syndrome. History has truly repeated itself. Good post.

[Rookiescot]

13 minutes ago, JohninDubin said:

I am not so sure that it was hidden by Heath so much as unanticipated. The truth of the matter is that there were a lot of laws passed by the EU, but in an average year, this accounted for 12% of all new UK legislation. Importantly though 95% of these laws were voted for by the UK govs of the day with just 0.6% of all new legislation being imposed on the UK "against our will". And even doesn't tell the true story. 

Many of the laws that were opposed but still "imposed" were the result of lobbying by interest groups who were also political finance contributors. So Consolidated Widgets would lobby the gov to oppose a proposed EU law or a section within it. The gov might actually be in favour of that law being passed. CW might be regular political donors for say £50k a year. If the gov refuses to act, they will lose that donation for years to come, or even permanently. They look around the EU Chamber and calculate what are the chances of it passing? If it looks like a certainty, they vociferously announce their disapproval. They fail to stop the law being enacted. They then go back to CW and tell them "WE tried our best but we were outvoted. Is our cheque in the post"? 

But there is something else to be considered. The fact that a PM of the day does not want a certain EU law passed, does not mean that if the people were allowed to vote on it, they would concur with this. The reality is that the laws that were imposed by Brussels against the genuine will of the gov is probably about 0.25% of all UK legislation that was passed between 1973 and 2020

Thats the thing. Ask any Brexiteer WHICH laws the EU passed which directly effected them and they will all say freedom of movement.

Then claim that freedom of movement was not a deciding issue for them when voting for Brexit.

The fact is the UK government (be it Labour or Conservative) enacts far more laws which the public do not like but somehow thats different.

[JohninDublin]

7 hours ago, Fluke said:

Apart from the fact that this is a current development and Biden is now POTUS and also this story has nothing at all to do with the USA and completely nothing to do with Trump

Have you forgotten Trump voicing his opinion on Brexit just before the vote? Or how about Bolton saying that if the UK pulled out of the EU on Oct 31st, there could be a trade deal signed the following day? Or what about US spokesmen in various gov depts saying that any trade deal would be dependent on us accepting banned US agricultural products, or Trump himself saying that access to the NHS must be on the table. That was something he later back-pedalled on when May told him that such a statement might derail Brexit.

For the life of me, I cannot understand why Trump was so keen on interfering with Brexit. Maybe it was the influence of Putin, who we are now aware of interfered in Brexit will media bots. Putin, who calls himself anti-fascist, also supported the Fascist National Front in the French elections. They were also in favour of leaving the EU. How much of a coup would it be for Putin to see both the EU's only nuclear powers outside the EU, especially as the Lisbon Treaty made provision for a European Defence Force. And with the disrespect and lies told by Trump about NATO, who benefits most if either the Euro-Army or NATO collapses? 

I can think about many reasons why the UK should have voted to stay in the EU, but the paramount one for me, is that if it was in Putin's interest for us to do so, could it possibly be in our interests too?

[JohninDublin]

7 hours ago, AussieBob said:

You need some help about seeing reality - cognitive bias has you trapped. It has absolutely nothing to do with that guy inside your head, and everything to do with the politics of countries like Poland that are going more right wing.  

What concerns me about Trump, is how he gets particularly friendly with those countries that are prepared to give the EU a hard time. As I've already said, the person who is going to benefit most from a fractured EU, is Putin, and Trump has been an enabler for him.

I've yet to hear anyone explain how our best interests and that of Putin converge.

[JohninDublin]

7 hours ago, Fluke said:

Yes, rather typical , the "tolerant" Left, refusing to accept that others have a different opinion to them and those with a different opinion need to be attacked and silenced , because they are WRONG 

You post looks like the "left" invented "cancel culture". It was already around in the late 40's and early 50's with the "Hollywood Ten", and carried on into the 80's with the multi award winning TV show "Lou Grant" being cancelled because it's star, Edward Asner, was a self-declared Marxist. It has carried on even into this century with another multi-award nominated show, "Politically Incorrect" being cancelled because of the Right's outrage at comments made by it's host, Bill Maher.

[Fester]

1 hour ago, Rookiescot said:

Faux EU democracy when the UK runs a first past the post election system?

Something which gives a party, which the majority did not vote for, an absolute majority in parliament.

That party then has the power to decide on its leader, screw with the election boundaries. Stuff the courts and civil service with its cronies. Threaten the media. Make appointments to the unelected house of Lords and of course get its snout in the feed trough of government contracts rewarding its financial supporters. Foreign people gaining cash for access, cash for peerages, cash for questions, the list of sleaze is endless.

The party which won is not even held accountable to the manifesto it was elected on.

UK democracy v EU parliament democracy. Dont make me laugh.

The issue here is the EU. Not the UK. The EU Parliament has far less power, no comparison. 

So I'll laugh then. 

[JohninDublin]

7 hours ago, Fluke said:

Are you aware that this story is about the Prime minister of Poland and that Poland top law Courts have recently rejected E.U laws in favour of Polish laws ?

Are you aware that there has been a systematic removal of Judges from the Polish Judiciary if they have been guilty of the crime of ruling against the gov?

During the meantime, we see compliant judges in Poland overruling superior competent courts. Does that disrespect for the rule of law, not disturb you? 

Edited October 9, 2021 by JohninDubin

[Fester]

16 minutes ago, JohninDubin said:

What concerns me about Trump, is how he gets particularly friendly with those countries that are prepared to give the EU a hard time. As I've already said, the person who is going to benefit most from a fractured EU, is Putin, and Trump has been an enabler for him.

I've yet to hear anyone explain how our best interests and that of Putin converge.

Why shoud anyone explain? The issue here is the Apple EU Crumble.

[Fester]

27 minutes ago, JohninDubin said:

Have you forgotten Trump voicing his opinion on Brexit just before the vote? Or how about Bolton saying that if the UK pulled out of the EU on Oct 31st, there could be a trade deal signed the following day? Or what about US spokesmen in various gov depts saying that any trade deal would be dependent on us accepting banned US agricultural products, or Trump himself saying that access to the NHS must be on the table. That was something he later back-pedalled on when May told him that such a statement might derail Brexit.

For the life of me, I cannot understand why Trump was so keen on interfering with Brexit. Maybe it was the influence of Putin, who we are now aware of interfered in Brexit will media bots. Putin, who calls himself anti-fascist, also supported the Fascist National Front in the French elections. They were also in favour of leaving the EU. How much of a coup would it be for Putin to see both the EU's only nuclear powers outside the EU, especially as the Lisbon Treaty made provision for a European Defence Force. And with the disrespect and lies told by Trump about NATO, who benefits most if either the Euro-Army or NATO collapses? 

I can think about many reasons why the UK should have voted to stay in the EU, but the paramount one for me, is that if it was in Putin's interest for us to do so, could it possibly be in our interests too?

Trump commented but did not interfere, unlike Obama. Let's get ready to crumble!

[Fester]

50 minutes ago, Rookiescot said:

Thats the thing. Ask any Brexiteer WHICH laws the EU passed which directly effected them and they will all say freedom of movement.

Then claim that freedom of movement was not a deciding issue for them when voting for Brexit.

The fact is the UK government (be it Labour or Conservative) enacts far more laws which the public do not like but somehow thats different.

No they won't. 

[JohninDublin]

4 minutes ago, Fester said:

Why shoud anyone explain? The issue here is the Apple EU Crumble.

Well if you put it like that, it's a straight "yes" or "no" question. Do you think it may add something to the debate if people were to give reasons why they hold such opinions?

[Fester]

1 hour ago, Rookiescot said:

Thats a lengthy way of saying "I am offended by your point but you are not wrong".

What qualifies as a genuine refugee? Someone who has been processed through the screening system. Someone who then has EU citizenship.

Ah then we get to your glossing over the freedom of movement issue. It was a massive issue for Brexiteers. All that "Coming over here and taking our jobs and driving down wages" nonsense.

Turns out they were actually doing the jobs that needed done. Like truck drivers for example.

But at the same time they were also "Coming over here and living off benefits and getting free houses".

Astonishing isnt it? They were taking all the jobs AND not working.

Now Poland and Hungary do not want even genuine refugees. Thats a simple fact. But because they are being forced to by the EU they are now arguing that their domestic law has priority.

The EU should throw them out. Tell them to go see what life is like outside the EU.

The UK is currently a glowing example of how that will be. 

No it's not. Of course youare wrong. All the other stuff you just wrote is wrong too.

[Fester]

2 minutes ago, JohninDubin said:

Well if you put it like that, it's a straight "yes" or "no" question. Do you think it may add something to the debate if people were to give reasons why they hold such opinions?

Your "how our best interests and that of Putin converge?" question is loaded and so ridiculous you'll have to explain it to us, with the answer, not the other way round.  

[JohninDublin]

7 minutes ago, Fester said:

Trump commented but did not interfere, unlike Obama. Let's get ready to crumble!

You've lost me there. How did Obama interfere other than by commenting? Why is a comment by one, interference, and the other not.

It's noteworthy than when Obama commented, that the Right were outraged, but they made no such comment on Trump.

[Rookiescot]

8 minutes ago, Fester said:

No it's not. Of course youare wrong. All the other stuff you just wrote is wrong too.

Do please expand upon your answer. What did I say that was wrong?

[Rookiescot]

13 minutes ago, Fester said:

No they won't. 

They wont what?

[JohninDublin]

1 minute ago, Fester said:

Your "how our best interests and that of Putin converge?" question is loaded and so ridiculous you'll have to explain it to us, with the answer, not the other way round.  

Your comment is bordering on the ludicrous. I've already said I cannot see how this is possible, and yet you expect me to ask a question to which I freely admit I don't know then answer. I think there are rules about trolling on this forum.

If you think the question is "loaded", then perhaps it's incumbent upon you to explain how so?

[Rookiescot]

34 minutes ago, Fester said:

The issue here is the EU. Not the UK. The EU Parliament has far less power, no comparison. 

So I'll laugh then. 

Its nice that you are laughing. However you do not seem to be addressing the points I made.

[JohninDublin]

7 hours ago, gummy said:

Let me just say that as I started this thread it was about whether the EU will survive or not.  Nothing to to do with garbage about Trump , Bannon or any other non European. Now if you can not grasp that then please refrain from posting deflective garbage.

WADR, unless you want "yes" or "no" answers, limiting comments involving non-Europeans misses the threats to the existence of the EU. Take Trump for example. When he said that the NHS must be on the table in any future trade deal, had he not rolled back on that I think Brexit would have died a rapid death. Even then the US continued to interfere in Brexit. 

I think people need to understand that Brexit was the prototype and understand how it got to that. Foreign non-EU influence played it's part. On the other hand, after the FTA between Japan and the EU, the Japanese were virtually begging us not to leave. By that time it was nearly "closing time" and the Japanese came to th party too late.

[JohninDublin]

7 hours ago, Fester said:

What is relevant in the cases of Hugary and Poland is that they were both part of the former Soviet Bloc - today they see certain similarities between being part of that bloc and being part of the EU.

You offer no factual evidence to support the false claims Trump & Co have influenced this backlash against the EU, which has been building, since at least 2015, over legal, financial, punitive and immigration matters. 

That's rich coming from the Hungarians in particular considering their record in WWII supporting the Nazis and murdering Jews. As for the Poles, I think that their recent actions in attempting to purge academics, the censorship and closing of media outlets that don't follow the party line, and purging of judges who are not compliant tells me that they are far more aligned to the Soviets. 

Maybe I don't understand your point. Perhaps you can tell me from a Hungarian/Polish viewpoint when the EU sent tanks into Budapest to crush an uprising? Or maybe when both countries were denied democratic rights such as voting by the EU. Or maybe it was that like the Soviets, they were denied property rights by the EU.

I certainly don't understand most of your other claims either. Regarding immigration in particular, we were importing more non-EU citizens than we were from the EU. We were not part of Schengen. We had border controls and we had a right to refuse admission to undesirables which we exercised. It worked both ways, and we had free movement in the EU. 

[JohninDublin]

7 hours ago, Rookiescot said:

Yes I am aware of this. Poland will not voluntarily leave the EU. It gets way to much out of membership. Like I said. The Polish PM is a right wing nutjob who has packed the courts with his supporters. Its pure theater for his right wing nutjob supporters.

There is more chance that Poland will be thrown out of the EU if it doesnt start obeying the rules. 

Hungary is doing the same.

I wish you were right about Poland being made to "toe the line", but there is nothing in the EU constitution that allows expulsion of a member state.

[Fester]

1 hour ago, JohninDubin said:

That's rich coming from the Hungarians in particular considering their record in WWII supporting the Nazis and murdering Jews. As for the Poles, I think that their recent actions in attempting to purge academics, the censorship and closing of media outlets that don't follow the party line, and purging of judges who are not compliant tells me that they are far more aligned to the Soviets. 

Maybe I don't understand your point. Perhaps you can tell me from a Hungarian/Polish viewpoint when the EU sent tanks into Budapest to crush an uprising? Or maybe when both countries were denied democratic rights such as voting by the EU. Or maybe it was that like the Soviets, they were denied property rights by the EU.

I certainly don't understand most of your other claims either. Regarding immigration in particular, we were importing more non-EU citizens than we were from the EU. We were not part of Schengen. We had border controls and we had a right to refuse admission to undesirables which we exercised. It worked both ways, and we had free movement in the EU. 

When did the EU send tanks into Budapest to crush an uprising?

Sorry I'm so behind the times! 

[Fester]

1 hour ago, Rookiescot said:

Do please expand upon your answer. What did I say that was wrong?

Everything.

[Fester]

1 hour ago, JohninDubin said:

WADR, unless you want "yes" or "no" answers, limiting comments involving non-Europeans misses the threats to the existence of the EU. Take Trump for example. When he said that the NHS must be on the table in any future trade deal, had he not rolled back on that I think Brexit would have died a rapid death. Even then the US continued to interfere in Brexit. 

I think people need to understand that Brexit was the prototype and understand how it got to that. Foreign non-EU influence played it's part. On the other hand, after the FTA between Japan and the EU, the Japanese were virtually begging us not to leave. By that time it was nearly "closing time" and the Japanese came to th party too late.

Take Trump for example.  

Foreign non-EU influence played it's part. 

[Fester]

1 hour ago, Rookiescot said:

Its nice that you are laughing. However you do not seem to be addressing the points I made.

You have a point?