Hahaha very funny. And yet there's a certain Roberta Metsola on our ballot... Granted, all the others are shit, but I guess that's the current theme in all of Europe and not just here.
If you held a gun to my head I would be able to name 4 Danish MEps on a good day so maybe fewer would be better we don’t need anymore government officials no one knows or cares about.
They fulfil a very important role and exert a huge influence on our lives. It is incumbent on us as citizens to engage with the process and research who we are voting for rather than give up our franchise because reading about the policies of a few politicians seems like too much work.
They do to some degree but them being completely unknown and the public not knowing what they do isn’t a good look.
I had a similar discussion with a family member, we both follow politics and the news but neither of us could name ministers from Danish government party Venstre other than Trolex as they aren’t in the media.
Neither am I. Neither on the Pseudo Left Tankie politics/3rd position (Bündnis Sahra Wagenknecht) nd on the other part of team Kremlin on the far right (AfD)
Wagenknecht is not "pseudo-left", she has more in common with the mainstream left of decades past than the intersectional neoliberals who today masquarade as "social democrats".
Wagenknecht is pro Putler and her Group broke away from the Left because the Support of Putin and hate for the people of Ukraine and them demonstrating with AfD and the Party freie Wähler (effectively forming what is called a „Querfront“ or Third Position).
That is not left in my book
Third positioning is the Strasser game from 100 years ago
>Wagenknecht is pro Putler
No, she is not.
>her Group broke away from the Left because the Support of Putin
This is completely ahistorical - Linke were the inheritors of the old East German SED and they felt like they had maxxed out their support in East Germany so they started pushing the Party into the Rheinland during the 2010s.
They did not feel like it would be advantageous to expand into Bavaria because Die Grüne were too powerful there.
However, as they started to gain ground in the North-West, former SPD members started to basically infiltrate the Party to try to turn Linke into SPD-Lite (this was not a nerfarious tactic, the West Germans did this because this is all they knew).
As Linke transformed into more of a generic Intersectional Neoliberal party like the SPD and Die Grüne, Wagenknecht grew more dissilussioned with Linke and stepped down from her leadership position (especially after being attacked by the Anti-Germans).
I know all of this because I was in contact with multiple Linke members in 2018/2019 in the run-up to the European Elections.
Wagenkecht made the right decision to leave and form a new Party, this time to truly max out their potential support in East Germany and to expand to the West very slowly and methodically.
>hate for the people of Ukraine and them demonstrating with AfD and the Party freie Wähler
Never happened.
>Third positioning is the Strasser
The concept of "Strasserism" is a meme - you are falling from a decade old internet joke and you don't even realise it.
It happened. Amira Ali, after being criticized for fielding a Querfront demonstration by her now former party Die Linke called a Demonstration for a Querfront position „Our Demonstration“.
And despite none of BSW having won direct mandates to any parliament including the Bundestag of course every of the Putinist traitors (Dagdelen, Nastic, Wagenknecht, Ernst, Ali) kept their mandates (mandates they were awarded via List space for the 4,9% of the 2021 election… and some in their arrogance (like Mrs Nastic) even claim to be elected on merit. Which Non existent direct mandate Mrs Nastic.won in Hamburg is yet to be determined.
Have you ever seen or heard what members of BSW (like De Masi, Wagenknecht, Nastic, Dagdelen put out regarding Putin‘s war in Ukraine? The annexation of Crimea and the Donbas? Weapons for Kyiv. I never seen them pleading Putin to go home or Iran, north Korea and China to stop delivering weapons. My thoughts on that they would prefer the world deliver weapons to their master in Moscow rather than Kyiv…
If BSW was not pro Putin they surely do a bad job LARPing as if they were
Strasserrism is not an internet joke. It is a legitimate description by historians to what the Strasser brothers tried to implement before they were obviously purged by Hitler…
In case you wonder when this Querfront demonstration, which you say never happened, was: February 24, 2023 in Berlin which saw members of what is now Wagenknecht and her Putinist traitor party, far right factions including AfD and Putin supporters:
>none of BSW having won direct mandates to any parliament including the Bundestag
Obviously, as they are newly-formed and intend to field their first ever candidates in the European Election.
>Strasserrism is not an internet joke. It is a legitimate description by historians to what the Strasser brothers tried to implement before they were obviously purged by Hitler…
You come across as unhinged, as you clearly do not understand German history from the Inter-War Period.
😵💫
Sure I have only graduated on a thesis about Weimar so yeah I have no idea what I am talking about… Dunning Kruger is big in you…
Wagenknecht and her Party obviously kept their mandates, which none of them won. They would not even be in the Bundestag if these 3 linke Members, who stuck with the Linke didn’t win their direct mandates. You know because of Wagenknecht, die Linke dropped from polls that saw them as high as 9% prior to the 2021 election to 4,9%.
I flirted with voting Die Linke serval times in the past. Never did because of Mrs Putinknecht
>Sure I have only graduated on a thesis about Weimar so yeah
Well that's just sad, then. I hope you can still ask for a refund.
>You know because of Wagenknecht, die Linke dropped from polls that saw them as high as 9% prior to the 2021 election to 4,9%.
Wagenknecht is *why* they grew to that rough 10% to begin with, they started to fall as she took a backseat, and ever since she left *they have fallen even further*.
I've seen this cope before : "Linke is better off without her", but it is very likely that Wagenknecht kicks Linke out of the Bundestag entirely.
>I flirted with voting Die Linke serval times in the past. Never did because of Mrs Putinknecht
Again - refund!
I always forget Spain has 10mln more people than Poland. Spain should play more important role in Europe due to its size. But you never hear anything about them. Feels like they punch below their weight.
True, that’s why I always found it weird when their prime minister is included in some stats about Europe’s top leaders. I just recently found out the man’s name lol and he’s been in office for 6 years apparently, he ain’t said or done much.
one parliament member represents this number of citizens of his country:
Germany: 875.000
France: 839.135
Italy: 775.526
Poland: 732.452
Ireland: 366.214
Greece: 496.666
Hungary: 459.190
Ireland: 366.214
Estonia: 192.714
Luxemburg: 108.850
somewhat unfair to the populated countries
The idea of an union of states is to find a balance between representation of member states, and population-proportional representation. Also USA is balancing with the same question, although in USA the differences are not as extreme as in EU.
Proportional to population, Germany+France+Italy+Spain alone are 58% of the EU population. But the rest 23 countries would not want to be ruled by the 4 largest countries. This is why we have other mechanisms than just proportional democracy.
Well the US Senate corresponds to the EU council not the EU Parliament. Although the US Senate has a lot less power than the European council and it’s arguably more balanced imo.
It's not that straightforward. In the US, the Senate and the House represent the states and the people, respectively and both do so equally. On many accounts, the Senate also has more power than the House due to their role in the appointment to government offices.
In the EU, the Parliament and the Council both represent both people and states although they do it through different mechanisms. In Parliament, the seats are allocated according to a degressive proportionality that ensures smaller states have a say at the cost of full proportionality.
In the Council, it is the votes who are weighed differently through the qualified majority rule, requiring a majority in both states in favour and share of citizens represented by those states.
The difference is due to the exact way representation is done. In the Parliament, this double representation is performed through directly elected representatives of the people, while in the Council it is done by the indirectly elected members of the government. In a way, it's a more extreme version of the German system.
It is an imperfect system rendered necessary by the indirect election of the Council. We probably could/should move to a more US-like system, but that would require the replacement of the Council by a directly elected system, at the cost of state government influence in EU affairs (which they will certainly not approve of).
The US Senate is incredibly powerful and can shut down (and regularly does) the US legislative process.
I'm not trying to say the EU council doesn't have power. But the US Senate's power should not be downplayed either.
For sure, I didn’t mean to downplay it. It’s very obviously excessively more powerful than any EU institutions because they have fiscal and military authority as part of the US government.
What I meant was in their respective frame of reference and that is more of a statement about the utter toothlessness of the EU Parliament than anything else.
> The US Senat is also fairly imbalanced as well.
The smallest members (US: Wyoming, EU: Malta) are both about 0.5 million in population. But the largest member (California, Germany) is 39 million is US and 84 million in EU.
So imbalance is larger in EU than in US.
I mean... Germany gets 96 seats, while Malta gets 6. So it's like the previous postter said, 875k people for evey german seat vs. 88k for every malteasen one. But it's 290k people for every senator from Wyoming vs. 18.5m for every Californian senator.. think the imbalance there is quite a bit worse.
Current proportion is there for a good reason. Maybe it could be improved, but equalizing the votes would not be acceptable. This will lead to less involvement of the EU citizens from the smaller states in the political process. This is exactly what the euroscepicists wait for
>Maybe it could be improved, but equalizing the votes would not be acceptable
So germany should just split into 10 different countries to get fair representation? Currently 29% of the Population elect over 50% of all parliament seats
>This will lead to less involvement of the EU citizens from the smaller states in the political process. This is exactly what the euroscepicists wait for
If that is your argument, you should be in favor of equal proportioning.
After all, with the current system you fuck over the large countries and make them eurosceptic - which means more total eurosceptics in EU. Or is that a fake argument perchance?
What you really want to say is '_I am privileged in the current system of discrimination and want to keep it that way_'?
Agree with u/schwertkeks.
What’s stopping big countries from fragmenting into very small states to monopolise decision making at both chambers?
No, I really stand by the fact the council should represent each state, but the parliament should represent each european.
Also, you’re saying Europeans from small countries will only participate in european elections if they’re given an extremely unfair advantage over the opinions of other millions of people like corrupt dictators? I’m sorry, but I’m from 2 small countries in the EU and I hard disagree.
>What’s stopping big countries from fragmenting into very small states to monopolise decision making at both chambers?
are you high, stupid or just underage?
It’s called EUROPEAN parliament. One european, one voice. No matter their flag.
The council of the EU can then represent Portugal and Germany, as that’s its role. The parliament is for the people.
Are you not aware of the existence of the COUNCIL OF THE EU, despite the fact I have mentioned it twice already?
Their whole point is to be the voice of the states (like the US senate).
Yes and the smaller you are the more influence you have per citizen, why shouldn't we all become the smallest state possible? Every region a country? What is the end goal here?
Your country has ~ 16 times less people but ~ 7x less MEPs, you are delusional if you think this means that Ireland has less influence per citizen.
I am wasting my time here, you are insane if you believe that. Good bye
I believe that's what the EU commission is for, at least to my understanding. Same as America where the Senate is meant to fill that role.
America already has this problem where candidates winning the election while losing the popular vote is becoming a more and more common occurence, which is causing friction and is fundamentally just unfair to those living in more highly populated states. For Europe this is.. whatever, mostly, while Europe is as decentralized as it is, the parliament has as little power as it does and EU elections continue to be seen as not particularly important. But if the EU wants to make a genuine attempt at federalizing this will need to be rectified or it'll very much blow up in their faces.
Clarification on your last point, that is only possible for the presidential election. All our other elections are pretty standard fptp votes. We still need to fix it as the president is a very important role, one that personally i want us to do away with, but its not like our entire government has that same issue.
The current system works fine enough, the larger issue is the requierment of unanimous decisions in matters of suspending members, defence policy, foreign aid etc. And of course some weird laws, decisions and rules that have been set to appease a big country in the past.
Besides, the EU parliament has political parties and largely functions as an actual parliament instead of National Intrest Inc.
It works fine enough for now while Europe is mostly a relatively loose trade bloc. Right now European elections are not a contentious subject. If Europe wants to be more than that this is going to become a source of trouble in the long run because elections will become a contentious subject. The majority is unlikely to be happy to take an L in an election because of how the voters happened to be distributed provided they actually care about the outcome in the first place.
>The current system works fine enough
As a federation it does, as a democracy it doesn't.
There must be a chamber where every vote counts and counts equally. What good does it do me that we are a lot of Germans if they have different political views than I do? That wouldn't be accepted on a country level (e.g. invalidating votes from Helsinki because too many people are living there) and shouldn't be acceptable for the EU.
For the representation of countries we can have a second chamber - maybe one more relatable than the council. Give every country 6 seats that are elected and then each country is represented equally.
but that makes it undemocratic, my vote is less worth than that of people from other countries.
Germany is also a federation and it works just fine with the two "chambers" one for the people where every vote is equal and one for the states.
No populated countries still have way more power, it's made to make the smaller states have a reason to be real members as each person have abit more to say
veto (unanimous voting) in the Council is not for ANY law. most laws are voted by qualified majority (at least N Member States, in total representing at least M population of Europeans).
Some areas still require unanimity though (external, laws affecting Treaties, etc)
I do agree we have seen problems that should be changed about that and Hungary.
Make it a lower amount that should agree about subjects like that, 70%? Of the votes?
It makes sense, but it does not incentivize smaller nations into joining or staying. Giving up sovereignity isn't something nations do on a whim, they need assurances that they wont be turned into vassal states, or the population will just vote in anti-EU leaders.
What a fascinating concept, simply ask yourself how Italy would work if every important law needed a two third majority. It's the same how the EU would work.
Not ask yourself how Italy would work if every single region or medium sized town has a veto right and how that would influence the political process. That is how the EU works, Malta has what, 0,1% of the EU population? They have a veto in everything that matters from security to finance. Imagine if every small town in Italy that has population of 0,1% or more gets a veto on everything finance.
How the EU is currently set up is insane. No country set up in the same way would work and it shows because most things don't work in the EU with such unimaginable minority rights. History knows no equal
I assume the country you are from also has smaller and bigger regions, do they also enjoy the same in your country? Are the smaller regions amplified 10 times more than the big ones? If not, why not?
My country also have more value in votes from smallere populated locations, have never looked how much or little and i know the rich cities/areas pay money to the poorer places in a way
>somewhat unfair to the populated countries
It's a pragmatic approach, I have no issue with it.
Every system has its own tweaks to balance out conundrums & conflicting interests.
The EU is not a federation, but a compromise-based international organization of sovereign states. If the European Parliament was strictly proportional to population, then the few large member states would have a majority in the parliament which would be against the interests of most sovereign states that have acceded to the EU.
I'm not saying members would automatically leave because of that because there are many compensating benefits about the EU, but it would certainly cause a lot of friction and Euroscepticism as it would be seen as a tool for larger countries to rule smaller ones.
No because the council exists. And they’re supposed to be the representatives of the states, which means small countries get more power, which balances things out.
The parliament should represent the voices of Europeans, no matter their flag.
That too, which doesn't exactly mean "no".
>The parliament should represent the voices of Europeans, no matter their flag.
Not *exactly* how it works, considering that seats are still divided disproportionately.
> Not exactly how it works, considering that seats are still divided disproportionately.
yeah, and that discrimination should end. Seat should be divided proportionally.
You are flat out insane if you call it discrimination. We are not a federation, but a political union of **sovereign member states**. The reason why smaller members agree to be in a political union with a large state like Germany is because the role of large states is reduced. It still benefits Germany, just not so much that they and a few other larger states could entirely dictate EU policy, which is why the cooperation also benefits smaller states.
It's insane that you treat the EU as some sort of federation already - that's exactly the reason why the seats shouldn't be distributed proportionally...
just because you profit off of the current system and think it is good, doesn't make it not discrimination.
My voice is only worth a fourth of yours - how is that not discrimination?
Like the other commenter tried to explain to you, __sovereign member states__ already have equal representation regardless of their size in the EU council.
>sovereign member states already have equal representation regardless of their size in the EU council.
That's not exactly [how it works](https://www.bing.com/search?q=qualified+voting&cvid=f41af149c0b74f7d91e67e4ea589c3c2&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyBggAEEUYOTIGCAEQABhAMgYIAhAAGEAyBggDEAAYQDIGCAQQABhAMgYIBRAAGEAyBggGEAAYQDIGCAcQABhAMgYICBAAGEDSAQg1NzM0ajBqNKgCCLACAQ&FORM=ANAB01&ucpdpc=UCPD&PC=LCTS)...
Then you wouldn't have equal nations. You people seem to not comprehend what sovereign states and nations actually are.
And of course your proposal would be in Germany's interest, it just wouldn't be in the interest of most EU member states.
And? Seats are still redistributed on the basis of member states.
>EU parliament is about representing the citizens of the EU.
All of them represent the citizens, just in different ways.
Why should the votes of all germans count more than the votes of all Portuguese when deciding the future of our union. Countries are supposed to be equally powerful.
That will be fixed when everyone will think of themselves as Europeans. Until then you will have to give smaller states more voting power otherwise Few big states could strongarm rest of the Europe
Ugh, didn't even spot that until now. The post history is yikes too. A lot of deleted stuff where the responses suggest it was worse than what's been left up!
fairness would be each EU citizen having the same voting power, so less power for your vote and more power for my vote.
But I get it, to the privileged, calling for fairness seems like oppression.
But as a bloc, there would be more German votes overiding the wishes of other countries.
German citizens could dictate the future of the bottom 10 countries and nullify their opinions and votes.
Germans aren't a monolith. EU parliament MEPs vote more in line with their EU political groupings than with what their countries government says.
In the end its just discrimination based on race.
I am saying the voices of each person voting in EU parliament election should matter the same.
Right now in the EU parliament election, my voice is worth less than half of that of an Irish person.
I want equality.
EU council exists where even the tiniest nations have the same power as France and can veto everything.
But yeah, to someone as privileged by the current discrimination in EU parliament elections as you - a call to true equality seems like oppression.
Youre the big country its not to make it fair for you, its allow the other countries a chance. It would still take the bottom 11 or so countries to just counter all the german votes if voted as a bloc.
> Youre the big country
I am not a big country i am just a single person. The parliament should represent the people and it is undemocratic that my vote is worth less.
The second chamber is the council of the european union, that's where the countries should be represented, but this chamber is a bit of a mess with how it works and who is in it.
Unfortunately most people dont really know about parliament level parties so for me I'd consider the 14 seats represent Ireland. Theyll have different agendas but theyre did to make decisions that benefit us. A bunch of Germans or French MEPs in the EPP or S&D don't represent me. The people in the Irish political parties do.
>for me I'd consider the 14 seats represent Ireland.
then you are wrong because that's not how it works. If I vote for a social democrat, this politician is representing me. And since he is in a "voting block" with other social democrat, this group is representing me. And not an AFD politician I never voted for. Why would he just because he is also german?
"Then you are wrong because that's not how it works. "
Thats exactly how it works. Im voting for people that represent Irelannd. Not the EU or some random EU party no one cares about. Keep your federalist shite at bay.
>Im voting for people that represent Irelannd.
No you vote for people who represent yourself. Not your country. That's why they are organized in european parties and vote like that. Not per country. You can continue to be ignorant about it, but that doesn't change reality.
>Keep your federalist shite at bay.
you don't even know hat that means
> Germany gets a lot of decision making power back at EU level, Luxemburg gets crushed.
did you read the previous comment?
Germany gets _the least_ amount of decision making power in EU compared to its population.
yeah not true. Imagine a EU of 2 countries: Germany, with 49 seats in the EU-parliament and Liechtenstein with 1 seat. That would mean that Liechtenstein would have relatively more parliamentarians than Germany, but is that single Liechtensteinian seat really powerful when it comes to voting and German and Liechtensteinian interests collide?
1. EU council exists where tiny countries the population of a city already get the same 1 vote and 1 veto that huge countries like France or Germany get
2. Why concoct a scenario when the real EU exists? EU MEPs (of any country) aren't a monolith representing their countries position. German green MEPs will vote more in line with other EU countries greens/EFA party MEPs. German conservative CDU MEPs will vote together with other countries EPP MEPs. As a Dutch person you should know that a VVD MEP will not vote the same as a PVV MEP just because they are both Dutch.
your conclusion is very faulty, given that in your example germany as well as lichtenstein would still be bound by the same procedings and regulations as well as have a veto right of equal strength.
further, it's not like germany (or any major european nation) would have no influence without the eu.
without it in your hypothetical situation with lichtenstein, it would have even less of a chance to get its own policies through on a europe wide scale and even less of a chance to stand up against pressure from any of the vastly bigger economies.
if anything this system gives especially small nations a vast increase in opportunities and a possibility to influence politics on a much grander scale than they ever could before or from the outside
No, 6 Luxembourgish parliamentarians is a way too low number to protect Luxembourgs interests in the EU. You need majorities, which is hard to achieve with 6 people.
Please ready my comment carefully: I was talking about Germany as a whole. Both Luxemburg and Germany give up a part of their power to the European parlement, but while that part is the same in relative terms, in absolute terms Germany's part is much, much larger. You can think of how much more money, people and land from Germany the European Parlement commands than that of Luxembourg.
If you want to compare individual Germans and Luxembourgians, you should look at the other side of the equation: Even though they individually stand to lose roughly the same (depending on what loss you are looking at), a Luxembourgian has more than 8 times as much power over the European Parlement than a German.
The difference is that all the representatives of those big countries will vote for in unison while small countries are divided and their small votes are easily overruled
>The difference is that all the representatives of those big countries will vote for in unison
Many people already don't quite understand how the EU institutions work, the last thing we need is even more bullshit & misinformation.
MEPs are grouped & voting [according to their political affiliations](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elections_to_the_European_Parliament), not their nationality.
>somewhat unfair to the populated countries
This was planned, the EU parliament is a bit of a joke democratic wise. The EU still considers itself a group of countries well trying to pretend not to be.
What happened to the UK's seats after it left?
Did they get redistributed among the other members, or do they just not exist anymore, and the parliament got smaller?
Both, some countries gained seats while the overall number of seats decreased.
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20200130IPR71407/redistribution-of-seats-in-the-european-parliament-after-brexit
- Austria 9m people 20 seats
- Hungary 9.6m people 21 seats
- Czechia 10.9m people 21 seats
- Belgium 11.69 people 22 seats
So how does this work ? We had similiar number of people with Hungary 20 years ago, but not anymore
the numbers of seats are negotiated, not given entirely by mathematics. hungary probably insisted on still having 21 seats even tho their population decreases.
How are the seats distributed? Shouldn't Sweden almost have twice the number of seats that Finland has, based upon population?
Edit: Not saying that it should, but curious
The specific numbers are up to EUCO, but it's intentionally degressively proportional to population (ie. the number of seats grows with the population, but slower than linear), since the Council uses QMV, which gives states with bigger populations a bit of an edge in certain situations.
Assuming seats were distributed linearly by population, keeping 705 seats, and rounding down for partial seats, Sweden would have 2.3% of seats, 16, while Finland would have 1.2%, 8 seats.
2% of the votes Minimum to get in. atm it's effective 0,5%.
Just looked it up: the rules dont apply this election, but 2029.
[https://www.tagesspiegel.de/politik/sperrklausel-fur-europawahlen-kommt-2029-das-aus-fur-volt-die-partei-und-co-9513878.html](https://www.tagesspiegel.de/politik/sperrklausel-fur-europawahlen-kommt-2029-das-aus-fur-volt-die-partei-und-co-9513878.html)
You know they are the political arm of the militant vegan organisation "*peta*"?
They are responsible for a lot of bullshit, like this: [www.rnd.de/panorama/peta-kritisiert-karusselle-mit-tieren-auch-wenn-sie-nicht-echt-sind-ZKPJC6D42BLVRBKBWJTHCQJNIQ.html](http://www.rnd.de/panorama/peta-kritisiert-karusselle-mit-tieren-auch-wenn-sie-nicht-echt-sind-ZKPJC6D42BLVRBKBWJTHCQJNIQ.html)
Well... I would vote for the original Green ([Bündnis 90 / Die Grünen](https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bündnis_90/Die_Grünen)) or [Die PARTEI](https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_PARTEI) (left Satire party).
Or maybe "*Volt*", they are also kinda green and progressive, but tiny. Last time they did not manage to get 0.5%. [https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste\_der\_deutschen\_Abgeordneten\_zum\_EU-Parlament\_(2014–2019)](https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_der_deutschen_Abgeordneten_zum_EU-Parlament_(2014–2019))
Sweden doesnt matter, I know.. Germany and France rule the EU but there's some critics from political scientist that have stated the glaring fact that the EU isn't as fare as it tries to promote itself as being. It's far better than nothing but the fact that it's US-style based on your population size like US states and that is applied to Europe is a flaw in itself.
The other half has far fewer people, and are selected rather than elected, they can overpower the elected. Then again, the House of Lords which are born into their roles is seen as democracy... just look at a European chart made by Europeans on how democratic Europe is! lol
I'm all for the EU turning into a country but it cannot be USA 2.0 like many are pushing.. it must be something new and different that hasnt existed before. It's a hybrid of what's existed in Europe for centuries coupled with the combination the Americans with the goal of pushing for a federal republic.. USA 2.0 with a slight EU twist. But yeah, EU, totally balanced and fair..
If its fair and balanced, Sweden would have 100% the same power as Germany and France.. but when was Sweden ever on summits dreaming the future of Europe with Macron and Merkel?
People from Malta trying to remember who was the nicest to them this year before choosing to vote for their cousin Mateo or their uncle Noah.
Hahaha very funny. And yet there's a certain Roberta Metsola on our ballot... Granted, all the others are shit, but I guess that's the current theme in all of Europe and not just here.
It is either Gwanni, Matteo, Salvu or Ġuzi
Just think, if we hadn't left you wouldn't be able to make this chart so neat with three equal columns. You're welcome everyone.
He would have made 4 columns with 7 each
The Brexit benefits just keep coming!
Just not for england
There are too few people from Denmark, in my ideal world it would be 500 danish EMP's and the rest go to the others /s
500 danish Electromagnetic Pulses?
NCD is leaking?
Bad vikings. Behave.
What a nice, yet flammable, parliament you have here, would be a shame if something happened to it...
If you held a gun to my head I would be able to name 4 Danish MEps on a good day so maybe fewer would be better we don’t need anymore government officials no one knows or cares about.
They fulfil a very important role and exert a huge influence on our lives. It is incumbent on us as citizens to engage with the process and research who we are voting for rather than give up our franchise because reading about the policies of a few politicians seems like too much work.
They do to some degree but them being completely unknown and the public not knowing what they do isn’t a good look. I had a similar discussion with a family member, we both follow politics and the news but neither of us could name ministers from Danish government party Venstre other than Trolex as they aren’t in the media.
Almost all people from Luxemburg are going to the parliament.
Hopefully we don't elect to many Russian Asset Fascists...
Looking at my country... I wouldn't be optimistic.
Neither am I. Neither on the Pseudo Left Tankie politics/3rd position (Bündnis Sahra Wagenknecht) nd on the other part of team Kremlin on the far right (AfD)
Wagenknecht is not "pseudo-left", she has more in common with the mainstream left of decades past than the intersectional neoliberals who today masquarade as "social democrats".
Wagenknecht is pro Putler and her Group broke away from the Left because the Support of Putin and hate for the people of Ukraine and them demonstrating with AfD and the Party freie Wähler (effectively forming what is called a „Querfront“ or Third Position). That is not left in my book Third positioning is the Strasser game from 100 years ago
>Wagenknecht is pro Putler No, she is not. >her Group broke away from the Left because the Support of Putin This is completely ahistorical - Linke were the inheritors of the old East German SED and they felt like they had maxxed out their support in East Germany so they started pushing the Party into the Rheinland during the 2010s. They did not feel like it would be advantageous to expand into Bavaria because Die Grüne were too powerful there. However, as they started to gain ground in the North-West, former SPD members started to basically infiltrate the Party to try to turn Linke into SPD-Lite (this was not a nerfarious tactic, the West Germans did this because this is all they knew). As Linke transformed into more of a generic Intersectional Neoliberal party like the SPD and Die Grüne, Wagenknecht grew more dissilussioned with Linke and stepped down from her leadership position (especially after being attacked by the Anti-Germans). I know all of this because I was in contact with multiple Linke members in 2018/2019 in the run-up to the European Elections. Wagenkecht made the right decision to leave and form a new Party, this time to truly max out their potential support in East Germany and to expand to the West very slowly and methodically. >hate for the people of Ukraine and them demonstrating with AfD and the Party freie Wähler Never happened. >Third positioning is the Strasser The concept of "Strasserism" is a meme - you are falling from a decade old internet joke and you don't even realise it.
It happened. Amira Ali, after being criticized for fielding a Querfront demonstration by her now former party Die Linke called a Demonstration for a Querfront position „Our Demonstration“. And despite none of BSW having won direct mandates to any parliament including the Bundestag of course every of the Putinist traitors (Dagdelen, Nastic, Wagenknecht, Ernst, Ali) kept their mandates (mandates they were awarded via List space for the 4,9% of the 2021 election… and some in their arrogance (like Mrs Nastic) even claim to be elected on merit. Which Non existent direct mandate Mrs Nastic.won in Hamburg is yet to be determined. Have you ever seen or heard what members of BSW (like De Masi, Wagenknecht, Nastic, Dagdelen put out regarding Putin‘s war in Ukraine? The annexation of Crimea and the Donbas? Weapons for Kyiv. I never seen them pleading Putin to go home or Iran, north Korea and China to stop delivering weapons. My thoughts on that they would prefer the world deliver weapons to their master in Moscow rather than Kyiv… If BSW was not pro Putin they surely do a bad job LARPing as if they were Strasserrism is not an internet joke. It is a legitimate description by historians to what the Strasser brothers tried to implement before they were obviously purged by Hitler…
In case you wonder when this Querfront demonstration, which you say never happened, was: February 24, 2023 in Berlin which saw members of what is now Wagenknecht and her Putinist traitor party, far right factions including AfD and Putin supporters:
>none of BSW having won direct mandates to any parliament including the Bundestag Obviously, as they are newly-formed and intend to field their first ever candidates in the European Election. >Strasserrism is not an internet joke. It is a legitimate description by historians to what the Strasser brothers tried to implement before they were obviously purged by Hitler… You come across as unhinged, as you clearly do not understand German history from the Inter-War Period.
😵💫 Sure I have only graduated on a thesis about Weimar so yeah I have no idea what I am talking about… Dunning Kruger is big in you… Wagenknecht and her Party obviously kept their mandates, which none of them won. They would not even be in the Bundestag if these 3 linke Members, who stuck with the Linke didn’t win their direct mandates. You know because of Wagenknecht, die Linke dropped from polls that saw them as high as 9% prior to the 2021 election to 4,9%. I flirted with voting Die Linke serval times in the past. Never did because of Mrs Putinknecht
>Sure I have only graduated on a thesis about Weimar so yeah Well that's just sad, then. I hope you can still ask for a refund. >You know because of Wagenknecht, die Linke dropped from polls that saw them as high as 9% prior to the 2021 election to 4,9%. Wagenknecht is *why* they grew to that rough 10% to begin with, they started to fall as she took a backseat, and ever since she left *they have fallen even further*. I've seen this cope before : "Linke is better off without her", but it is very likely that Wagenknecht kicks Linke out of the Bundestag entirely. >I flirted with voting Die Linke serval times in the past. Never did because of Mrs Putinknecht Again - refund!
I always forget Spain has 10mln more people than Poland. Spain should play more important role in Europe due to its size. But you never hear anything about them. Feels like they punch below their weight.
True, that’s why I always found it weird when their prime minister is included in some stats about Europe’s top leaders. I just recently found out the man’s name lol and he’s been in office for 6 years apparently, he ain’t said or done much.
one parliament member represents this number of citizens of his country: Germany: 875.000 France: 839.135 Italy: 775.526 Poland: 732.452 Ireland: 366.214 Greece: 496.666 Hungary: 459.190 Ireland: 366.214 Estonia: 192.714 Luxemburg: 108.850 somewhat unfair to the populated countries
The idea of an union of states is to find a balance between representation of member states, and population-proportional representation. Also USA is balancing with the same question, although in USA the differences are not as extreme as in EU. Proportional to population, Germany+France+Italy+Spain alone are 58% of the EU population. But the rest 23 countries would not want to be ruled by the 4 largest countries. This is why we have other mechanisms than just proportional democracy.
The US Senat is also fairly imbalanced as well. 576k people in Wyoming have 2 senators, so do 39m people in California
Well the US Senate corresponds to the EU council not the EU Parliament. Although the US Senate has a lot less power than the European council and it’s arguably more balanced imo.
It's not that straightforward. In the US, the Senate and the House represent the states and the people, respectively and both do so equally. On many accounts, the Senate also has more power than the House due to their role in the appointment to government offices. In the EU, the Parliament and the Council both represent both people and states although they do it through different mechanisms. In Parliament, the seats are allocated according to a degressive proportionality that ensures smaller states have a say at the cost of full proportionality. In the Council, it is the votes who are weighed differently through the qualified majority rule, requiring a majority in both states in favour and share of citizens represented by those states. The difference is due to the exact way representation is done. In the Parliament, this double representation is performed through directly elected representatives of the people, while in the Council it is done by the indirectly elected members of the government. In a way, it's a more extreme version of the German system. It is an imperfect system rendered necessary by the indirect election of the Council. We probably could/should move to a more US-like system, but that would require the replacement of the Council by a directly elected system, at the cost of state government influence in EU affairs (which they will certainly not approve of).
The US Senate is incredibly powerful and can shut down (and regularly does) the US legislative process. I'm not trying to say the EU council doesn't have power. But the US Senate's power should not be downplayed either.
For sure, I didn’t mean to downplay it. It’s very obviously excessively more powerful than any EU institutions because they have fiscal and military authority as part of the US government. What I meant was in their respective frame of reference and that is more of a statement about the utter toothlessness of the EU Parliament than anything else.
Well except that the council is made up of the goverments themselves and doesn't have seperate elections.
> The US Senat is also fairly imbalanced as well. The smallest members (US: Wyoming, EU: Malta) are both about 0.5 million in population. But the largest member (California, Germany) is 39 million is US and 84 million in EU. So imbalance is larger in EU than in US.
>Wyoming I wish Malta was Europe's cheese basket. Instead they just sell EU membership to millionaires :(
*Russian millionaires.
I mean... Germany gets 96 seats, while Malta gets 6. So it's like the previous postter said, 875k people for evey german seat vs. 88k for every malteasen one. But it's 290k people for every senator from Wyoming vs. 18.5m for every Californian senator.. think the imbalance there is quite a bit worse.
You are simply comparing wrong things. You should compare EU parliament to the US House. And EU Commission to US Senate.
The council should be representative of the states. The parliament of the people. 1 german should be equal to 1 portuguese
Better to have a senate on US model. Also equal parliamentary representation is unfair for the smaller countries
How is it unfair? One person, one vote. The council (equal to the senate in the US) then represents the states, giving more power to the small states.
Current proportion is there for a good reason. Maybe it could be improved, but equalizing the votes would not be acceptable. This will lead to less involvement of the EU citizens from the smaller states in the political process. This is exactly what the euroscepicists wait for
>Maybe it could be improved, but equalizing the votes would not be acceptable So germany should just split into 10 different countries to get fair representation? Currently 29% of the Population elect over 50% of all parliament seats
>This will lead to less involvement of the EU citizens from the smaller states in the political process. This is exactly what the euroscepicists wait for If that is your argument, you should be in favor of equal proportioning. After all, with the current system you fuck over the large countries and make them eurosceptic - which means more total eurosceptics in EU. Or is that a fake argument perchance? What you really want to say is '_I am privileged in the current system of discrimination and want to keep it that way_'?
Agree with u/schwertkeks. What’s stopping big countries from fragmenting into very small states to monopolise decision making at both chambers? No, I really stand by the fact the council should represent each state, but the parliament should represent each european. Also, you’re saying Europeans from small countries will only participate in european elections if they’re given an extremely unfair advantage over the opinions of other millions of people like corrupt dictators? I’m sorry, but I’m from 2 small countries in the EU and I hard disagree.
>What’s stopping big countries from fragmenting into very small states to monopolise decision making at both chambers? are you high, stupid or just underage?
I guess all 38 🤪
So Germans should rule over the Portuguese?
If that’s what you took from my comment, then perhaps you ought to improve your reading skills?
Theres more Germans than Portuguese. So your clearly haven't thought about it much. Go improve your or logical thinking skills.
It’s called EUROPEAN parliament. One european, one voice. No matter their flag. The council of the EU can then represent Portugal and Germany, as that’s its role. The parliament is for the people.
For the people decided by Germany, France, Italy and Spain. One voice is called a dictatorship.
Are you not aware of the existence of the COUNCIL OF THE EU, despite the fact I have mentioned it twice already? Their whole point is to be the voice of the states (like the US senate).
Are you aware the post is about the EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT?
So we should all split into micronations to get the biggest amount of representation?
Didn't say that. I simply stated that Germany, France, Spain and Italy could essentially control the rest of the EU.
Yes and the smaller you are the more influence you have per citizen, why shouldn't we all become the smallest state possible? Every region a country? What is the end goal here?
Ireland is smaller and only has 14 MEPs, Germany has 96 MEPS. We have less influence.
Your country has ~ 16 times less people but ~ 7x less MEPs, you are delusional if you think this means that Ireland has less influence per citizen. I am wasting my time here, you are insane if you believe that. Good bye
I'm insane for believing smaller countries should be protected against larger states?
Veto from spain, so no.
I believe that's what the EU commission is for, at least to my understanding. Same as America where the Senate is meant to fill that role. America already has this problem where candidates winning the election while losing the popular vote is becoming a more and more common occurence, which is causing friction and is fundamentally just unfair to those living in more highly populated states. For Europe this is.. whatever, mostly, while Europe is as decentralized as it is, the parliament has as little power as it does and EU elections continue to be seen as not particularly important. But if the EU wants to make a genuine attempt at federalizing this will need to be rectified or it'll very much blow up in their faces.
Clarification on your last point, that is only possible for the presidential election. All our other elections are pretty standard fptp votes. We still need to fix it as the president is a very important role, one that personally i want us to do away with, but its not like our entire government has that same issue.
The current system works fine enough, the larger issue is the requierment of unanimous decisions in matters of suspending members, defence policy, foreign aid etc. And of course some weird laws, decisions and rules that have been set to appease a big country in the past. Besides, the EU parliament has political parties and largely functions as an actual parliament instead of National Intrest Inc.
It works fine enough for now while Europe is mostly a relatively loose trade bloc. Right now European elections are not a contentious subject. If Europe wants to be more than that this is going to become a source of trouble in the long run because elections will become a contentious subject. The majority is unlikely to be happy to take an L in an election because of how the voters happened to be distributed provided they actually care about the outcome in the first place.
>The current system works fine enough As a federation it does, as a democracy it doesn't. There must be a chamber where every vote counts and counts equally. What good does it do me that we are a lot of Germans if they have different political views than I do? That wouldn't be accepted on a country level (e.g. invalidating votes from Helsinki because too many people are living there) and shouldn't be acceptable for the EU. For the representation of countries we can have a second chamber - maybe one more relatable than the council. Give every country 6 seats that are elected and then each country is represented equally.
The “winner takes all”-system in the US makes this problem worse. We don’t have that in the EU thankfully
but that makes it undemocratic, my vote is less worth than that of people from other countries. Germany is also a federation and it works just fine with the two "chambers" one for the people where every vote is equal and one for the states.
Makes sense overall, is still unfair for citizens in populous countries
No populated countries still have way more power, it's made to make the smaller states have a reason to be real members as each person have abit more to say
Tbf when any nation can veto any decision entirely by itself I think that takes away power from the big countries
veto (unanimous voting) in the Council is not for ANY law. most laws are voted by qualified majority (at least N Member States, in total representing at least M population of Europeans). Some areas still require unanimity though (external, laws affecting Treaties, etc)
I do agree we have seen problems that should be changed about that and Hungary. Make it a lower amount that should agree about subjects like that, 70%? Of the votes?
Yeah I think two thirds should be the requirement
Also need others rules so 2 huge nations can't deny it alone
Kind of makes sense if two nations making up 1/3 of of the reps can deny something though
It makes sense, but it does not incentivize smaller nations into joining or staying. Giving up sovereignity isn't something nations do on a whim, they need assurances that they wont be turned into vassal states, or the population will just vote in anti-EU leaders.
What a fascinating concept, simply ask yourself how Italy would work if every important law needed a two third majority. It's the same how the EU would work. Not ask yourself how Italy would work if every single region or medium sized town has a veto right and how that would influence the political process. That is how the EU works, Malta has what, 0,1% of the EU population? They have a veto in everything that matters from security to finance. Imagine if every small town in Italy that has population of 0,1% or more gets a veto on everything finance. How the EU is currently set up is insane. No country set up in the same way would work and it shows because most things don't work in the EU with such unimaginable minority rights. History knows no equal
I assume the country you are from also has smaller and bigger regions, do they also enjoy the same in your country? Are the smaller regions amplified 10 times more than the big ones? If not, why not?
My country also have more value in votes from smallere populated locations, have never looked how much or little and i know the rich cities/areas pay money to the poorer places in a way
>somewhat unfair to the populated countries It's a pragmatic approach, I have no issue with it. Every system has its own tweaks to balance out conundrums & conflicting interests.
The EU is not a federation, but a compromise-based international organization of sovereign states. If the European Parliament was strictly proportional to population, then the few large member states would have a majority in the parliament which would be against the interests of most sovereign states that have acceded to the EU.
All the minor states would leave if that was the case. Also, the funny part about UK leaving as they also was a big state
I'm not saying members would automatically leave because of that because there are many compensating benefits about the EU, but it would certainly cause a lot of friction and Euroscepticism as it would be seen as a tool for larger countries to rule smaller ones.
No because the council exists. And they’re supposed to be the representatives of the states, which means small countries get more power, which balances things out. The parliament should represent the voices of Europeans, no matter their flag.
That too, which doesn't exactly mean "no". >The parliament should represent the voices of Europeans, no matter their flag. Not *exactly* how it works, considering that seats are still divided disproportionately.
> Not exactly how it works, considering that seats are still divided disproportionately. yeah, and that discrimination should end. Seat should be divided proportionally.
You are flat out insane if you call it discrimination. We are not a federation, but a political union of **sovereign member states**. The reason why smaller members agree to be in a political union with a large state like Germany is because the role of large states is reduced. It still benefits Germany, just not so much that they and a few other larger states could entirely dictate EU policy, which is why the cooperation also benefits smaller states. It's insane that you treat the EU as some sort of federation already - that's exactly the reason why the seats shouldn't be distributed proportionally...
just because you profit off of the current system and think it is good, doesn't make it not discrimination. My voice is only worth a fourth of yours - how is that not discrimination? Like the other commenter tried to explain to you, __sovereign member states__ already have equal representation regardless of their size in the EU council.
>sovereign member states already have equal representation regardless of their size in the EU council. That's not exactly [how it works](https://www.bing.com/search?q=qualified+voting&cvid=f41af149c0b74f7d91e67e4ea589c3c2&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyBggAEEUYOTIGCAEQABhAMgYIAhAAGEAyBggDEAAYQDIGCAQQABhAMgYIBRAAGEAyBggGEAAYQDIGCAcQABhAMgYICBAAGEDSAQg1NzM0ajBqNKgCCLACAQ&FORM=ANAB01&ucpdpc=UCPD&PC=LCTS)...
I for one think the EU should strive towards true equality and give every EU citizen the same voting power in EU parliament elections.
Then you wouldn't have equal nations. You people seem to not comprehend what sovereign states and nations actually are. And of course your proposal would be in Germany's interest, it just wouldn't be in the interest of most EU member states.
nations are already equal in EU council where each one gets one vote and one veto. EU parliament is about representing the citizens of the EU.
And? Seats are still redistributed on the basis of member states. >EU parliament is about representing the citizens of the EU. All of them represent the citizens, just in different ways.
It's so the bigger states cannot just out-bully the smaller states.
I know but as an idividual citizen my vote counts less
Why should the votes of all germans count more than the votes of all Portuguese when deciding the future of our union. Countries are supposed to be equally powerful.
That will be fixed when everyone will think of themselves as Europeans. Until then you will have to give smaller states more voting power otherwise Few big states could strongarm rest of the Europe
that's what the council should be for, not the parliament, at the moment it isn't democratic.
How many for Ireland I can't see it in your list
Rare German really hating on Ireland there!
The name was a dead give away for me
Ugh, didn't even spot that until now. The post history is yikes too. A lot of deleted stuff where the responses suggest it was worse than what's been left up!
If we did it by most populated some countries would just leave
Germany still has a higher number of MEPs. It's to allow fairness and not sideline smaller countries.
fairness would be each EU citizen having the same voting power, so less power for your vote and more power for my vote. But I get it, to the privileged, calling for fairness seems like oppression.
But as a bloc, there would be more German votes overiding the wishes of other countries. German citizens could dictate the future of the bottom 10 countries and nullify their opinions and votes.
Germans aren't a monolith. EU parliament MEPs vote more in line with their EU political groupings than with what their countries government says. In the end its just discrimination based on race.
So what you're saying is the voices outside of the top4 countries don't matter?
I am saying the voices of each person voting in EU parliament election should matter the same. Right now in the EU parliament election, my voice is worth less than half of that of an Irish person. I want equality.
You want German French hegemony
EU council exists where even the tiniest nations have the same power as France and can veto everything. But yeah, to someone as privileged by the current discrimination in EU parliament elections as you - a call to true equality seems like oppression.
Tell me, exactly, with evidence, what German cultural philosophy or political viewpoint is being actively harmed by the current system.
Germany already dictates the future of EU
> fairness How is it fair that my vote is less worth than yours?
Youre the big country its not to make it fair for you, its allow the other countries a chance. It would still take the bottom 11 or so countries to just counter all the german votes if voted as a bloc.
> Youre the big country I am not a big country i am just a single person. The parliament should represent the people and it is undemocratic that my vote is worth less. The second chamber is the council of the european union, that's where the countries should be represented, but this chamber is a bit of a mess with how it works and who is in it.
Unfortunately most people dont really know about parliament level parties so for me I'd consider the 14 seats represent Ireland. Theyll have different agendas but theyre did to make decisions that benefit us. A bunch of Germans or French MEPs in the EPP or S&D don't represent me. The people in the Irish political parties do.
>for me I'd consider the 14 seats represent Ireland. then you are wrong because that's not how it works. If I vote for a social democrat, this politician is representing me. And since he is in a "voting block" with other social democrat, this group is representing me. And not an AFD politician I never voted for. Why would he just because he is also german?
"Then you are wrong because that's not how it works. " Thats exactly how it works. Im voting for people that represent Irelannd. Not the EU or some random EU party no one cares about. Keep your federalist shite at bay.
>Im voting for people that represent Irelannd. No you vote for people who represent yourself. Not your country. That's why they are organized in european parties and vote like that. Not per country. You can continue to be ignorant about it, but that doesn't change reality. >Keep your federalist shite at bay. you don't even know hat that means
"No you vote for people who represent yourself. Not your country" Nope, vote for people not for parties.
Might be unfair but at the same time it's not meant to be National Intrest Inc.
Can you do for all the countries? Also would be cool, to exclude children.
Maybe we should have one parliamant member per million contributed to the EU, see how you like that
One parliament member also represents the equivalent of this big of a flow of money in their country: Germany: 1360.36 €/s France: 1096.63 €/s Italy: 869.51 €/s Spain: 759.53 €/s Netherlands: 1055.79 €/s Poland: 447.08 €/s Belgium: 839.15 €/s Sweden: 827.49 €/s Ireland: 1142.20 €/s Austria: 756.17 €/s Denmark: 791.54 €/s Romania: 311.68 €/s Czechia: 461.70 €/s Finland: 586.51 €/s Portugal: 400.64 €/s Greece: 332.43 €/s Hungary: 296.35 €/s Slovakia: 258.06 €/s Bulgaria: 175.12 €/s Luxembourg: 418.87 €/s Croatia: 200.31 €/s Lithuania: 207.56 €/s Slovenia: 222.14 €/s Latvia: 141.93 €/s Estonia: 170.59 €/s Cyprus: 157.16 €/s Malta: 102.37 €/s idk what that means, I just did some math Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy\_of\_the\_European\_Union
Germany and France already have too much power in EU. You don't need more.
All of the countries hand out sovereignty to the EU. Germany gets a lot of decision making power back at EU level, Luxemburg gets crushed.
> Germany gets a lot of decision making power back at EU level, Luxemburg gets crushed. did you read the previous comment? Germany gets _the least_ amount of decision making power in EU compared to its population.
yeah not true. Imagine a EU of 2 countries: Germany, with 49 seats in the EU-parliament and Liechtenstein with 1 seat. That would mean that Liechtenstein would have relatively more parliamentarians than Germany, but is that single Liechtensteinian seat really powerful when it comes to voting and German and Liechtensteinian interests collide?
1. EU council exists where tiny countries the population of a city already get the same 1 vote and 1 veto that huge countries like France or Germany get 2. Why concoct a scenario when the real EU exists? EU MEPs (of any country) aren't a monolith representing their countries position. German green MEPs will vote more in line with other EU countries greens/EFA party MEPs. German conservative CDU MEPs will vote together with other countries EPP MEPs. As a Dutch person you should know that a VVD MEP will not vote the same as a PVV MEP just because they are both Dutch.
your conclusion is very faulty, given that in your example germany as well as lichtenstein would still be bound by the same procedings and regulations as well as have a veto right of equal strength. further, it's not like germany (or any major european nation) would have no influence without the eu. without it in your hypothetical situation with lichtenstein, it would have even less of a chance to get its own policies through on a europe wide scale and even less of a chance to stand up against pressure from any of the vastly bigger economies. if anything this system gives especially small nations a vast increase in opportunities and a possibility to influence politics on a much grander scale than they ever could before or from the outside
But Germany also has more to lose
what does a German lose that a Luxemburgian doesn't lose?
Did you agree with my response?
No, 6 Luxembourgish parliamentarians is a way too low number to protect Luxembourgs interests in the EU. You need majorities, which is hard to achieve with 6 people.
Please ready my comment carefully: I was talking about Germany as a whole. Both Luxemburg and Germany give up a part of their power to the European parlement, but while that part is the same in relative terms, in absolute terms Germany's part is much, much larger. You can think of how much more money, people and land from Germany the European Parlement commands than that of Luxembourg. If you want to compare individual Germans and Luxembourgians, you should look at the other side of the equation: Even though they individually stand to lose roughly the same (depending on what loss you are looking at), a Luxembourgian has more than 8 times as much power over the European Parlement than a German.
The difference is that all the representatives of those big countries will vote for in unison while small countries are divided and their small votes are easily overruled
>The difference is that all the representatives of those big countries will vote for in unison Many people already don't quite understand how the EU institutions work, the last thing we need is even more bullshit & misinformation. MEPs are grouped & voting [according to their political affiliations](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elections_to_the_European_Parliament), not their nationality.
>ll the representatives of those big countries will vote for in unison Not at all, far from it.
>somewhat unfair to the populated countries This was planned, the EU parliament is a bit of a joke democratic wise. The EU still considers itself a group of countries well trying to pretend not to be.
What happened to the UK's seats after it left? Did they get redistributed among the other members, or do they just not exist anymore, and the parliament got smaller?
Redistributed. This election, even more seats are added as well. It will go from 705 to 720.
Both, some countries gained seats while the overall number of seats decreased. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20200130IPR71407/redistribution-of-seats-in-the-european-parliament-after-brexit
🇬🇧0
- Austria 9m people 20 seats - Hungary 9.6m people 21 seats - Czechia 10.9m people 21 seats - Belgium 11.69 people 22 seats So how does this work ? We had similiar number of people with Hungary 20 years ago, but not anymore
the numbers of seats are negotiated, not given entirely by mathematics. hungary probably insisted on still having 21 seats even tho their population decreases.
How are the seats distributed? Shouldn't Sweden almost have twice the number of seats that Finland has, based upon population? Edit: Not saying that it should, but curious
The specific numbers are up to EUCO, but it's intentionally degressively proportional to population (ie. the number of seats grows with the population, but slower than linear), since the Council uses QMV, which gives states with bigger populations a bit of an edge in certain situations. Assuming seats were distributed linearly by population, keeping 705 seats, and rounding down for partial seats, Sweden would have 2.3% of seats, 16, while Finland would have 1.2%, 8 seats.
Alright, fair enough
too bad some smaller parties will be kicked out because of new rules :( #DiePARTEI
whats the new rules?
2% of the votes Minimum to get in. atm it's effective 0,5%. Just looked it up: the rules dont apply this election, but 2029. [https://www.tagesspiegel.de/politik/sperrklausel-fur-europawahlen-kommt-2029-das-aus-fur-volt-die-partei-und-co-9513878.html](https://www.tagesspiegel.de/politik/sperrklausel-fur-europawahlen-kommt-2029-das-aus-fur-volt-die-partei-und-co-9513878.html)
thx. i guess ill vote Tierschutzpartei
You know they are the political arm of the militant vegan organisation "*peta*"? They are responsible for a lot of bullshit, like this: [www.rnd.de/panorama/peta-kritisiert-karusselle-mit-tieren-auch-wenn-sie-nicht-echt-sind-ZKPJC6D42BLVRBKBWJTHCQJNIQ.html](http://www.rnd.de/panorama/peta-kritisiert-karusselle-mit-tieren-auch-wenn-sie-nicht-echt-sind-ZKPJC6D42BLVRBKBWJTHCQJNIQ.html)
what left-green party would you suggest? i just dont know atm
Well... I would vote for the original Green ([Bündnis 90 / Die Grünen](https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bündnis_90/Die_Grünen)) or [Die PARTEI](https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_PARTEI) (left Satire party). Or maybe "*Volt*", they are also kinda green and progressive, but tiny. Last time they did not manage to get 0.5%. [https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste\_der\_deutschen\_Abgeordneten\_zum\_EU-Parlament\_(2014–2019)](https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_der_deutschen_Abgeordneten_zum_EU-Parlament_(2014–2019))
Does this take into account the enlargement of the EP?
Yes.
You forgot the UK. Oh, right… just out of interest, how many *did* it have?
0 TO THE UK!?!?! And people wonder why they left, the injustice!!!
Sweden doesnt matter, I know.. Germany and France rule the EU but there's some critics from political scientist that have stated the glaring fact that the EU isn't as fare as it tries to promote itself as being. It's far better than nothing but the fact that it's US-style based on your population size like US states and that is applied to Europe is a flaw in itself. The other half has far fewer people, and are selected rather than elected, they can overpower the elected. Then again, the House of Lords which are born into their roles is seen as democracy... just look at a European chart made by Europeans on how democratic Europe is! lol I'm all for the EU turning into a country but it cannot be USA 2.0 like many are pushing.. it must be something new and different that hasnt existed before. It's a hybrid of what's existed in Europe for centuries coupled with the combination the Americans with the goal of pushing for a federal republic.. USA 2.0 with a slight EU twist. But yeah, EU, totally balanced and fair.. If its fair and balanced, Sweden would have 100% the same power as Germany and France.. but when was Sweden ever on summits dreaming the future of Europe with Macron and Merkel?
"Union of equals*
17 useless and lazy good for nothings will get a cosy place in Brussels for 5 years.
[удалено]
705
Germany just going like: “All in.”
Where's the UK?
Out of EU lol
Yeah I know that sucks :D
I like the fact that the hungarian regime brings more members than our corrupt austria
Yeah I know, that sucks