• azuth
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    8 days ago

    The EU is not a federal state.

    Its an international organization with sovereign independent States as members. Not ‘federal states’ like US or German states or ‘countries’ like Wales and Scotland that are part of the UK.

    It has more in common with the UN than the USA or Germany.

    The EU doesn’t do anything in such cases because the members did not agree to allow it to play a part in such matters. EU powers are delegated to it by members.

    The EU can’t kick someone out, they also can’t prevent anybody leaving.

    There are national armies, they do not answer to EU officials, I doubt they swear to uphold and defend EU law or the treaty of Lisbon, when I was conscripted we swore to uphold our nation’s constitution, laws and morals.

    There are some EU task forced (similar to NATO task forces) that deploy under EU decisions, they would definitely not follow EU commands versus their own country’s (they are mixed at unit level not individuals).

    You have a deeply wrong understanding of the EU to the point where you cannot meaningly criticize it or even roast it.

    • Melatonin@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 days ago

      Well thank you very much. They seem to have considerably more power than the UN. They print money, regulate industry, levy fines and penalties, and require action from members (accepting refugees), so your explanation is not great, but I’m obviously not understanding the EU’s true form.

      I’m not sure you’re aware of how much power they have consolidated while assuring you you are a sovereign, independent state. Which just seems to mean yes, they won’t help if you need it.

      • azuth
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        8 days ago

        The WTO can levy fines and penalties as well, I guess they are a state. The UN also requires compliance with various treaties from it’s members (including accepting refugees). Some EU members can be argued to be easier to whipped into compliance due to EU funds being critical to their level of living. Of course the IMF also has had a lot of leverage over poor countries, even EU ones.

        The EU does not have an army, or even a federal police force to enforce compliance in member states. It can only try to coax compliance by withholding funds and other benefits. Contrast this to Little Rock Nine, where the US government sent it’s own army (EU doesn’t have one) and was able to take control of the Arkansas NG from it’s government. The EU cannot do this. Especially not to fucking France.

        I’m not sure you’re aware of how much power they have consolidated while assuring you you are a sovereign, independent state. Which just seems to mean yes, they won’t help if you need it.

        They have been granted power in a lot of fields, including trade and human rights. It would not be a problem for my country to leave the EU, the issues would be the lack of market access. Your second sentence makes even less sense than usual, what help? Is that what you would call “the EU” (aka foreigners) sending their non-existent troops to run things? No thanks mate.

          • azuth
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            8 days ago

            You are welcome.

            The EU is a complicated thing. It’s certainly the most integrated international organization and pushes the envelope so to speak. It’s also portrayed as a equivalent to a state quite often, whether for practical (an easy if inaccurate analog) or even ideological (EU federalists) reasons.

            Also France is not in particular trouble at least in regards to it’s ability to function. At most legislative elections will be needed.

    • KubeRoot@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 days ago

      The EU can’t kick someone out

      Huh, can it really not? I never thought about it, but is this a case of it being specifically defined to not be able to, or is it more like there being no such procedure or precedent, where it might happen when a true need arises?

      • azuth
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 days ago

        There is no provision to expel a member, it was considered in drafts for the treaty of Lisbon but not included.

        It’s possible to suspend members’ voting rights but it requires an unanimous vote of the European council (sans the target member who can’t vote).

        In what way would it just happen? The treaties do not allow it, amending the treaties would require an unanimous vote, trying to circumvent would cause any of the non top members (pop or economy wise) to gtfo asap.